eS^75.  37   J8f, 


C    5   SEM    MSM 


^ 


s^ 


-p 


> 


A  GENERAL  AND  CRITICAL 


INTRODUCTION 


TO  THE  STUDY  OF 


HOLY    SCRIPTURE 


Copyright,  1897, 

BY 

A.  E.  Breen. 


A  GENERAL  AND  CRITICAL 


INTRODUCTION      f^:^  Sf  °' 


TO  THE  STUDY  OF 


Holy  Scripture 


BY 


A.  E.  BREEN,  D.  D. 


Jldaa     ypa(l>r)    OeoTTvevaro^    kuI    Q)(f>€XifjLO^     Trpo?     SiSaa-KaXiav^ 

7r/309  €\€<y)(^ov,  TT/Jo?   iiravopOcocriv,   tt/oo?   vaiSeiav  rrfv  iv 

SiKaioavvT).     "\va   aprio^   y    6  rov  deov  avOpwirofi, 

irpo^  irav  epyov  ayaObv  i^r]pria-/x€PO<i. 


ROCHESTER,  N.   Y. 

THE   JOHN    P.    SMITH    PRINTING    HOUSE 

1897 


(,}5<\n\<> 


,yfQ^    t>^^r>^/- 


fi^lU. 


/^w-ygV/A^ 


y^^  ^/^  .^1^  .  yr^^/.  ^^A  ^.    ^^-f^. 


r^jy,  <Pc.A  ^.    ^^. 


LOAN  STACK 


AUTHOR'S   PREFACE. 


No  man  can  speak  much  of  himself  or  his  own  achievement 
without  being  vain.  Therefore,  I  shall  be  brief.  My  justifi- 
cation for  adding  one  more  to  the  vast  number  of  the  world's 
books,  is  the  need  of  an  English  Introduction  to  Holy  Scrip- 
ture. Many  treatises  on  this  subject  exist  in  the  languages  of 
Europe,  and  in  the  Latin  tongue ;  but  when,  in  1893,  I  was 
appointed  to  teach  Holy  Scripture  in  St.  Bernard's  Seminary, 
I  was  unable  to  find  in  the  English  language  a  work  of  this 
nature  to  place  in  the  hands  of  our  students.  While  the 
English  language  surpasses  every  other  known  language  of  the 
world  in  the  vastness  and  excellence  of  its  literary  resources,  it 
is  deficient  in  scriptural  science. 

The  works  on  Scriptural  Introduction  that  we  have  in 
English  are  chiefly  of  protestant  authors,  and  are  inaccurate, 
filled  with  partisan  hatred  of  Catholicity,  and  they  have  not 
kept  pace  with  the  progress  of  thought  of  this  last  half 
century. 

Thereupon,  I  conceived  the  design  of  writing  my  book, 
and  it  is  the  result  of  four  years*  unremitting  toil. 

In  this  work,  my  aspirations  have  been  very  high.  How 
far  the  achievement  has  come  short  of  the  aspirations,  I  leave 
to  be  decided  by  the  judgment  of  the  public. 

I  have  tried  to  write  justly,  not  having  in  mind  to  advance 
any  cause  save  the  cause  of  truth. 

A  chief  feature  of  the  present  work  is  the  arrangement  of 
the  traditional  data  favoring  the  deuterocanonical  books  in 
parallel  columns  with  the  scriptural  passages  therein  quoted. 
This  is  the  result  of  great  labor,  but  I  believe  that  the  enhance- 
ment of  the  evidential  value  of  such  data  thus  arranged  repays 
such  labor. 

Another  feature  of  the  work,  which,  I  hope,  will  be  grate- 
ful to  students,  is  the  wide  margins  of  the  pages,  which  render 
it  possible  to  write  thereon  things  of  special  importance  heard 
from  the  teacher. 

It  would  fill  all  my  hopes  of  this  present  work  to  know 
that,  in  some  degree,  I  had  made  the  message  of  God  more 
known  and  more  loved. 

Rochester,  N.  Y.,  Oct.  13,  1897. 


53^75" 


33^ 


CONTENTS. 


Chapter.  Paob. 

I. — The  Existence  of    Revelation  and  the   Criterion 

Thereof, 1 

II. — Nature  of  Inspiration,          --....  17 

III. — Extent  of  Inspiration, 31 

IV.— The  Canon, 37 

V. — The  Canon  op  the  Old  Testament,        .       -       -       -  38 

VI. — Ezra  and  his  Influence, 43 

VII. — The  Alexandrian  Canon, 56 

VIII. — The  Canon  of  the  Church, 59 

IX.— The  Canon  of  the  Fathers  of  the  Fourth  Century, 

AND  First  Years  of  Fifth  Century,      -       -       -  143 
X.— The  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament  from  the  End  of 
THE  Fifth  Century  to  the  End  of  the  Twelfth 

Century, 218 

XI. — The  Canon  in   the  Church  from  the  Beginning  of 

Thirteenth  Century  to  Council  of  Trent,  -       -  258 

XII.— Decree  of  the  Council  of  Trent,         .       .       -       .  270 

XIII. — The  Canon  op  the  New  Testament,           -       -        -  282 

XIV. — The  New  Testament  of  the  Sects,         ....  348 

XV. — The  Apocryphal  books  of  both  Testaments,      -       -  349 

XVI. — The  Lost  Books  of  Both  Testaments,    ....  377 

XVII. — The  Hebrew  Text  op  the  Old  Testament,      -       -  379 

XVIII. — The  Greek  Text  of  the  New  Testament,      -       -       -  411 

XIX. — Some  Account  op  the  Uncial  Codices,        -       -       -  441 

XX. — The  Septuagint  and  its  Versions,          ....  477 

XXI.— Versions  Derived  prom  Septuagint,          -       -        -  491 

XXII.— The  Targums, 495 

XXIII.— The  Syriac  Versions, 502 

XXIV.— The  Egyptian  or  Coptic  Versions,         ....  507 

XXV. — The  Ethiopic  Versions  of  Scripture,         -        -        -  513 

XXVI.— The  Gothic  Version,            - 516 

XXVII. — The  Armenian  Version  op  Scripture,        -       -       -  519 

XXVIII. — Jerome  and  the  Vulgate, 525 

XXIX. — The  Authorization  op  the  Vulgate  by  the  Council 

op  Trent, -       -  588 

XXX. — The  Correction  op  the  Vulgate,        ....  550 

XXXI. — Modern  English  Versions  of  Scripture,      -       -        -  559 

XXXII. — Biblical  Hermeneutics, 577 

XXXin. — The  Interpretation  op  Scripture,         ....  585 

XXXIV. — ^Jewish  Interpretation, 588 

Appendix, 593 


INDEX  OF  PLATES. 


PAGB. 

The  Samakitan  Pentateuch, 409 

Specimen  op  Stichometrt,  Codex  Bezae, 423 

The  Vatican  Codex, 445 

The  Sinaitic  Codex, -       .       .       .       .     453 

The  Codex  op  St.  Ephbem,      -       - 458 

The  Codex  Claromontantts, 460* 

The  Hexapla  op  Okigen, -        -  486-487 

Early  English  Translations  of  the  Bible,  ....      575 

Appendix. 

Origin  op  Alphabet 600-601 

The  Kosetta  Stone,  .........         603 

The  Moabitic  Stone, 605 


A  General  Introduction  to 
Holy  Scripture. 


Chapter  I. 

The  Existence  of  Revelation  and  the  Criterion 

Thereof. 

Any  scientific  treatise  should  first  fix  its  subject  and  its 
limitations,  before  beginning  to  deal  therewith.  The  first 
step,  therefore,  in  this  Introduction  will  be  to  delineate  clearly 
the  subject  matter. 

The  existence  of  inspired  writings  is  a  fact  warranted  by 
the  most  convincing  data.  The  tradition  of  the  Jews,  the 
approbation  of  Christ,  the  traditions  of  Christians,  the  sublim- 
ity of  the  writings,  the  verification  of  prophecies,  and  the 
universal  belief  of  civilized  mankind  are  alone  natural  motives 
of  credibility  which  logically  produce  certainty.  Moreover, 
those  who  are  incorporated  in  the  organized  economy  of  the 
New  Law  have  the  living  voice  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  declaring 
through  the  Church:  '■'■And  this  supernatural  revelation, 
according  to  the  faith  of  the  universal  Church,  declared  in  the 
Holy  Tridentine  Synod,  is  contained  in  the  written  books  and 
unwritten  traditions,  which  have  come  down  to  us."  [Vat. 
Council,  Cap.  II,  De  Revelatione.] 

There  are  those  who  deny  the  existence  of  inspired  writ- 
ings ;  but  this  mere  denial,  based  upon  arbitrary  assertions,  is 
no  valid  reason  to  doubt  of  the  existence  of  that  sacred  deposit, 
whose  marvelous  nature  and  preservation  are  alone  proofs  of 
its  supernatural  character.  Few  are  the  higher  truths  that 
have  not  been  attacked  by  those  puny  sophists,  who  fritter 
away  their  lives  in  creating  systems,  which  a  credulous  unbelief 
readily  embraces.  Error  is  oft  more  specious  than  truth. 
Error  loves  the  maxims  of  the  vapid  philosophy  of  the  day. 
Error  skims  the  surface ;  it  is  the  easy  acquisition  of  labor- 
hating,  thoughtless  souls  :  the  pearl  of  truth  of  purest  ray  serene 


2  CRITERION    OF    INSPIRATION. 

lies  hiding  in  the  caves  of  deepest  ocean,  only  found  by  the 
patient  toil,  the  calm  thoughtfulness,  and  the  unbiased  mind 
•of  the  honest  truth-seeker. 

Having  once  placed  as  a  basic  position  that  there  exist 
•divinely  inspired  writings,  the  next  step  is  to  determine  how 
we  may  infallibly  discern  and  know  what  is  inspired  and  what 
is  not.  We  must  establish  an  adequate  criterion,  which  can 
discriminate,  from  all  other  books,  the  products  of  the  author- 
ship of  God. 

Inspiration,  in  its  formal  concept,  is  a  supernatural  psycJwl-. 
ogical  fact,  wrought  in  the  mind  of  the  inspired  agent  by  the 
First  Cause.  We  might  define  it,  using  the  conciseness  and  pre- 
cision of  the  Latin  idiom  :  Illustratio  mentis  et  motus  efficax 
voluntatis  a  Deo,  ad  exprimendum  infallibiliter  sensum  Dei,  seu 
ad  exprimenda  ea  omnia  et  sola  quae  Deus  vult.  Now  it  is 
plainly  evident  that  a  fact  of  such  nature  can  be  immediately 
known  but  to  two  beings,  God  and  the  person  inspired.  The 
action  takes  place  in  that  inner  theatre  of  action,  impervious 
to  our  sense,  and  is  as  barred  from  our  cognition  as  the  thought 
in  its  fount,  before  it  is  externalized  by  sensible  medium. 
Neither  is  it  necessary  that  it  should  always  be  known  to  the 
person  inspired.  Caiphas,  Jo.  XI,  49 — 52,  prophesied,  not 
knowing  that  he  did  so.  Card.  Newman  seems  to  incline  to 
the  belief  that  the  writer  of  the  2d  book  of  Maccabees  was  not 
<:onscious  of  his  inspiration ;  and,  also,  he  would  extend  this  to 
the  writer  of  Ecclesiasticus.*     I  believe,  however,  that  the    in- 

*"Nor  is  it  de  ^^  (for  that  alone  with  a  view  to  Catholic  Biblicists  I 
am  considering)  that  inspired  men,  at  the  time  when  they  speak  from  inspi- 
ration, should  always  know  that  the  Divine  Spirit  is  visiting  them. 

The  Psalms  are  inspired  ;  but,  when  David  in  the  outpouring  of  his  deep 
contrition,  disburdened  himself  before  his  God  in  the  words  of  the  Miserere, 
could  he,  possibly,  while  uttering  them,  have  been  directly  conscious  that 
every  word  he  uttered  was  not  simply  his,  but  another's  ?  Did  he  not  think 
that  he  was  personally  asking  forgiveness  and  spiritual  help  ? 

Doubt  again  seems  incompatible  with  a  consciousness  of  being  inspired. 
But  Father  Patrizi,  while  reconciling  two  Evangelists  in  a  passage  of  their 
narratives,  says,  if  I  understand  him  rightly  (ii.  p.  405),  that  though  we 
admit  that  there  were  some  things  about  which  inspired  writers  doubted,  this 
does  not  imply  that  inspiration  allowed  them  to  state  what  is  doubtful  as 
certain,  but  only  it  did  not  hinder  them  from  stating  things  with  a  doubt  on 
their  minds  about  them ;  but  how  can  the  All-knowing  Spirit  doubt  ?  or  how 
can  an  inspired  man  doubt,  if  he  is  conscious  of  his  inspiration  ? 

And  again,  how  can  a  man  whose  hand  is  guided  by  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  who  knows  it,  make  apologies  for  his  style  of  writing,  as  if  deficient  in 
literary  exactness  and  finish?  If  then  the  writer  of  Ecclesiasticus,  at  the 
very  time  that  he  wrote  his  Prologue,  was  not  only  inspired  but  conscious  of 
his  inspiration,  how  coiild  he  have  entreated  his  readers  to   'come  with 


CRITERION    OF   INSPIRATION.  3 

spired  writers,  properly  so  called,  were  conscious  of  their  in- 
spiration. 

In  relation  to  the  prophets,  we  may  not  doubt,  since  they 
solemnly  assert  in  their  books  :  "  Thus  saith  the  Lord."  From 
all  the  writers  of  the  New  Law  breathes  forth  a  subtle  authori- 
tative voice,  telling  us  that  the  Spirit  of  God  is  back  of  what 
they  say.  Let  us  then  assume  that  the  fact  of  inspiration  is 
known  to  God  its  author,  and  to  the  agent  in  whom  he  has 
wrought  this  effect.  How  may  this  knowledge  be  commnni- 
cated  to  us?  This  leads  us  to  the  consideration  of  the  CRI- 
TERION OF  Inspiration. 

An  examination  of  the  issue  will  convince  us  that  the  testi- 
mony of  the  inspired  agent,  unsupported  by  the  corroborative 
attestation  of  God,  is  not  sufficient.  In  the  first  place,  this 
means  would  be  subject  to  hallucination,  error,  and  fraud. 
Long  would  be  the  list  of  those  who,  from  one  or  other  of  these 
motives,  claimed  inspiration  from  God.  It  would  suffice  to 
mention  Mohammed  and  the  founder  of  Mormonism,  to  specify 
the  weakness  of  this  criterion.  But  granted  that  the  inspired 
agent  did,  in  any  case,  so  testify  as  to  merit  credence,  the  faith 
that  these  motives  of  credibility  would  produce  would  not  be 
divine  faith,  which  has  for  its  formal  motive  the  authority  of 
God\  but,  at  most,  it  would  be  only  human  faith ;  for  the  effect 
cannot  be  greater  than  the  cause,  and,  as  the  cause  of  this  cred- 
ibility was  not  divine  but  human,  the  faith,  its  effect,  would  be 
no  more  than  human  faith.  Now  it  is  exacted  that  we  be- 
lieve in  the  Scriptures  with  a  divine  faith.  Hence,  granted 
that  the  testimony  of  the  inspired  writer  might  be  trustworthy 
of  itself,  it  could  never  produce  more  than  human  credibility, 
which  is  not  sufficient  to  form  a  basis  for  absolute  and  divine 
faith.  No  creature  can  be  trusted  infinitely,  but,  when  we  are 
dealing  with  "  God's  epistle  to  his  creature  ",  absolute  trust  and 

benevolence,'  and  to  make  excuse  for  his  'coming  short  in  the  composition 
of  words '  ?  Surely,  if  at  the  very  time  he  wrote  he  had  known  it,  he  would, 
like  other  inspired  men,  have  said,  'Thus  saith  the  Lord,'  or  what  was 
equivalent  to  it.     ( XIX  Century  for  1884.) 

The  same  remark  applies  to  the  writer  of  the  second  book  of  Machabees, 
who  ends  his  narrative  by  saying,  '  If  I  have  done  well,  it  is  what  I  desired, 
but  if  not  so  perfectly,  it  must  be  pardoned  me.'  What  a  contrast  to  St. 
Paul,  who,  speaking  of  his  inspiration  (1  Cor.  vii.  40)  and  of  his  '  weakness 
and  fear '  (jMd  ii.  4),  does  so  in  order  to  hoast  that  his  '  speech  was,  not  in  the 
persuasive  words  of  human  wisdom,  but  in  the  showing  of  the  Spirit  and  of 
power.'  The  historian  of  the  Maccabees,  would  have  surely  adopted  a  like 
tone  of  'glorying,'  had  he  had  at  the  time  a  like  consciousness  of  his 
divine  gift."    (Ibid.) 


4  CRITERION    OF    INSPIRATION. 

certainty  are  required.  It  was  fitting  that  an  all-provident 
God  should  provide  man  with  this  means  of  certitude,  and  we 
believe  that  he  has  done  so,  and  these  considerations  are  lead- 
ing us  to  investigate  and  establish  it.  The  Prophets  and 
Apostles  merited  divine  faith  for  what  they  taught,  because 
they,  by  miracles,  established  their  divine  commission  to  teach. 
In  such  case,  this  faith  was  rendered  divine  by  the  corrobora- 
tive attestation  of  God  through  these  miracles.  But  how  shall 
man  always  and  in  every  case  be  able  to  discriminate  between 
the  divine  writings  and  books  of  purely  human  origin  ?  The 
Prophets  are  gone,  the  Apostles  are  gone ;  their  writings  have 
undergone  great  vicissitudes.  "  We  live  amid  the  dust  of  sys- 
tems and  of  creeds."  In  this  remote  age,  is  there  any  ade- 
quate criterion,  in  virtue  of  which  man  can  say,  this  book  is  of 
God,  and  this  other  is  not  ?  Were  there  not,  God  would  not 
have  sufficiently  provided  for  man ;  he  would  no  longer  be  the 
Heavenly  Father.  Men,  who  still  believe  in  a  personal  God, 
and  a  definite  form  of  religion,  generally  admit  that  some  such 
criterion  must  exist,  but  differ  widely  in  defining  it. 

The  early  Anglicans  set  up  as  a  criterion,  the  sublimity  of 
the  doctrines,  and  the  divine  harmony  of  the  elements  in 
Holy  Writ.  We  admit  that  such  propriety  does  exist  in  the 
Holy  Books,  but  we  deny  that  it  can  form  a  criterion  by  which 
we  may  discern  the  effect  of  God's  authorship  always  and  in- 
fallibly from  everything  else.  The  mutilated  gospel  of  Marcion, 
the  Koran  of  Mohammed,  the  apocryphal  gospels,  all  have 
more  sublimity  than  the  Books  of  Chronicles  and  the  Book  of 
Nehemias.  Yet  the  Chronicles  and  Nehemias  are  divine ;  and 
the  others  are  founded   in    error. 

Luther  and  his  followers  place  their  criterion  in  the  effect 
produced  in  one's  soul  by  the  reading  of  the  book.  Food,  they 
say,  is  judged  by  its  savour  ;  so,  also.  Holy  Scripture,  by  the 
soul's  taste.  That  which  feeds  the  heavenly  hunger  of  the  soul 
is  of  God ;  that  which  does  not,  is  spurious.  This  system 
once  received  much  favor,  but  it  is  now  considered  untenable 
by  the  protestants  themselves.  John  David  Michaelis,  the 
learned  professor  of  Gottingen,  [f  1791]  speaks  thus  of  this 
means :  "  This  interior  sensation  of  the  effects  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  and  the  conviction  of  the  utility  of  these  writings  to 
better  the  heart  and  purify  us  are  entirely  uncertain  criterions. 
As  regards  this  interior  sensation,  I  avow  that  I  have  never 
experienced  it,  and  those  who  have  felt  it  are  not  to  be  envied. 
It  cannot  evince  the  divine  character  of  the  book,  since  the 
Mohammedans  feel  it  as  well  as  christians,  and  pious  sentiments 


CRITERION    OF    INSPIRATION.  5 

can  be  aroused  by  documents  purely  human,  by  the  writings 
of  philosophers,  and  even  by  doctrine  founded  in  error."^ 
Burnett  also,  in  his  Exposition  of  the  XXXIX  Articles,  speaks 
thus  of  this  subjective  criterion:  "This  is  only  an  argument 
to  him  that  feels  it,  if  it  is  one  at  all ;  and,  therefore,  it  proves 
nothing  to  another  person."  No  subjective  criterion  could  ever 
be  apt  for  such  use,  since  it  would  depend  on  the  subjective 
dispositions  of  individuals,  and  one  and  the  same  individual 
would,  at  different  times,  be  differently  affected  by  the  same 
book.  Moreover,  this  pious  movement  can  come  from  other 
than  inspired  books.  A  man  will  feel  more  religious  emotion 
from  the  reading  of  the  Imitation  of  Christ  than  from  the  Book 
of  Judges.  But  experience  itself  disproves  this  system.  Honest 
men  attest  that  they  do  not  feel  this  pious  movement,  and  the 
opinion  may  now  be  said  to  be  obsolete. 

The  Calvinists  and  Presbyterians  set  up  as  a  criterion,  the 
particular  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  individual's 
soul.  This  system  is  cognate  to  the  Calvinistic  theory  of  the 
invisible  church,  and  they  both  fall  together.  Once  establish 
a  visible  authoritative  Magisterium,  and  such  means  of  inter- 
preting Holy  Scripture  would  be  incompatible  with  it.  It  is 
evident  that  such  a  system  of  private  inspiration  can  never  be 
proven.  There  never  can  be  any  available  data  to  establish 
such  secret  action.  It  must  ever  remain  a  gratuitous,  ground- 
less assumption.  It  is  exactly  opposite  to  the  economy  of 
God.  When  he  would  teach  the  world,  he  did  it  by  means  of 
divinely  commissioned  men,  directly  establishing  that  such 
mode  of  teaching  truth  would  last  always.  This  were  absurd, 
were  the  evangelization  of  mankind  to  be  effected  by  the  sole 
direct  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost  on  the  heart.  To  be  sure, 
no  man  can  be  brought  to  Christ  without  that  working  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  in  his  heart.  "  Nemo  potest  venire  ad  me,  nisi  Pater 
traxerit  eum.''  But  the  error  of  protestants  is  to  believe  that 
this  energy  of  the  Spirit  in  man's  soul  excludes  the  external 
authoritative  Magisterium.  The  power  of  the  Spirit  and  the 
Magisterium  are  two  causes  co-operating  to  produce  one  effect. 
All  the  texts  of  Scripture  alleged  by  the  protestants,  in  support 
of  this  system,  simply  prove  that  the  Holy  Ghost  moves  man 
to  Christian  belief  and  to  Christian  action  ;  and  the  same  power 
energizing  in  the  Church  vitalizes  it,  and  renders  it  capable  of 
its  great  mission  to  teach  all  mankind.  We  will  leave  the  pros- 
ecution of  this  train  of  argument  to  the  tract,  De  Locis  Theo- 

*(SinIeitung  in  tie  ®ottIid)en  ©diriften  be8  9?euen  S3unbe«. 


6  CRITERION    OF    INSPIRATION. 

logicis,  and  content  ourselves  here  with  a  few  a  posteriori  argu- 
ments. In  the  first  place,  did  the  Holy  Ghost  exert  such  action, 
he  would,  doubtless,  move  to  a  unanimity  of  faith ;  but  the 
exact  contrary  is  in  fact  verified.  The  sect  of  presbyterians 
are  split  on  some  of  the  basic  truths  of  Christianity.  Can  the 
Spirit  of  truth  inspire  them  with  doctrines  directly  opposed  ? 
The  recent  Briggs  controversy  has  shown  the  lack  of  any  religi- 
ous harmony  in  the  Presbyterian  church. 

I  will  here  excerpt  from  Milner's  End  of  Controversy  a  few 
examples  of  men  who  claimed  this  inspiration  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.  The  instances  are  based  upon  incontrovertible  histori- 
cal data.  Montanus  and  his  sect  first  claimed  this  private  in- 
spiration ;  we  may  see  what  spirit  led  him  on,  since  he  and 
others  of  his  sect  hanged  themselves.  After  the  great  Apos- 
tasy, commonly  called  the  Reformation,  had  been  inaugurated 
by  Luther,  there  arose  the  sect  of  the  Anabaptists,  who  pro- 
fessed that  it  had  been  commanded  them  by  direct  communi- 
cation from  God  to  kill  all  the  wicked  ones,  and  establish  a 
kingdom  of  the  just.*  Bockhold,  a  tailor  of  Leyden  was 
moved  by  tht  private  inspiration  of  the  Spirit  to  proclaim  him- 
self King  of  Sion.  He  married  by  the  same  impulse  eleven 
wives,  all  of  whom  he  put  to  death.  He  declared  that  God 
had  given  him  Amsterdam,  through  whose  streets  his  followers 
ran  naked  crying  out :  "  Woe  to  Babylon  !  woe  to  the  wicked  !  " 
Hermann,  the  Anabaptist  was  moved  to  proclaim  himself  the 
Messiah,  and  to  order :  "  Kill  the  priests ;  kill  all  the  magis- 
trates in  the  world  !     Repent ;   your  redemption  is  at  hand."  f 

All  these  excesses  were  done  upon  the  principle  and  under 
a  full  conviction  of  an  individual  inspiration.  In  England, 
Venner  was  inspired  to  rush  from  the  meeting-house  in  Cole- 
man St.,  proclaiming  "  that  he  would  acknowledge  no  sovereign 
but  King  Jesus,  and  that  he  would  not  sheathe  his  sword,  till 
he  had  made  Babylon  [which  emblemized  monarchy]  a  hissing 
and  a  curse,  not  only  in  England,  but  also  in  foreign  countries ; 
having  assurance  that  one  of  them  would  put  to  flight  a  thous- 
and, and  two  of  them,  ten  thousand."  On  the  scaffold,  he 
protested  that  he  was  led  by  Jesus.  The  records  of  George 
Fox,  the  founder  of  Quakerism,  furnish  abundant  evidence  of 
the  abominable  absurdities  into  which  this  supposed  inspiration 
led  the  Friends.  One  woman  rushed  naked  into  Whitehall 
Chapel,  when  Cromwell  was  there.     Another  came  into  the 

♦Sleidan.  De  Stat,  et  Reip. 

\Hi»t.  AJbr^e,  de  la  Re  forme  par  Brandt. 


CRITERION    OF    INSPIRATION.  7 

parliament  house  with  a  trencher,  which  she  there  broke  in 
pieces,  saying :  "  Thus  shall  he  be  broken  in  pieces."  Sweden- 
borg  declared  that  he  had  received,  at  an  eating  house  in  Lon- 
don, the  commission  from  Christ :  "  I  am  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  your  Creator  and  Redeemer.  I  have  chosen  you  to 
explain  to  men  the  interior  and  spiritual  sense  of  the  Scriptures. 
I  will  dictate  to  you  what  you  are  to  write."  Here,  in  the  very 
position  of  the  system,  he  contradicts  himself ;  for,  if  Christ 
gave  him  a  command  to  teach  men,  they  must  needs  pay  heed 
to  him.  Mohammed,  and  the  founder  of  the  foul  sect  of  Mor- 
mons claimed  private  inspiration.  Guiteau  claimed  the  moving 
of  the  Spirit  in  the  slaying  of  President  Garfield.  Wherefore,, 
we  maintain  that  the  system  of  private  inspiration,  which  logic- 
ally leads  to  such  absurdities,  is  in  itself  absurd  and  untenable. 

We  have  before  adduced  David  Michaelis'  rejection  of  the 
subjective  criterions.  He  substituted  for  these  an  objective 
criterion,  but  one  entirely  inadequate  to  effect  the  certitude  of 
inspiration.  I  am  not  aware  that  Michaelis  invented  a  criterion 
for  the  Old  Testament ;  his  criterion  for  the  books  of  the  New 
Testament  was  that  any  book  that  was  written  by  one  who  had 
received  the  "  Munus  Apostolicum  "  was  divinely  inspired.  Of 
course,  Michaelis  speaks  only  of  such  writings  as  the  Apostles 
wrote  on  things  in  some  way  pertaining  to  religion.  If,  for 
instance,  St.  Peter  bought  a  horse,  and  gave  therefor  a  promis- 
sory note,  that  note  would  not  be  inspired.  We  fully  admit, 
in  its  affirmative  sense,  the  position  of  Michaelis.  If  one  who 
had  received  the  apostolate  wrote  a  book,  it  would  be  inspired. 
Yet,  we  deny  that  this  is  a  criterion.  In  the  first  place,  a  cri- 
terion must  tell  me  not  only  that,  if  a  book  be  written  under 
certain  conditions,  it  is  inspired,  but  it  must  tell  me  that  certain 
definite  books  UNCONDITIONALLY  ARE  INSPIRED.  What  avails 
it,  if  a  man  tell  me  that,  if  the  Second  Epistle  of  Peter  be 
written  by  him,  it  is  inspired?  What  I  must  know  is  that  it  is 
the  word  of  God.  Again,  although  we  admit  the  affirmative 
supposition  of  Michaelis  proposition  to  be  true,  we,  by  no 
means,  admit  it  in  the  exclusive  sense ;  that  is,  we  do  not  admit 
that  only  those  books  written  by  the  Apostles  are  inspired.  It 
is  quite  certain  that  Michaelis  intended  the  exclusive  sense  of 
his  criterion,  but,  thus,  it  becomes  manifestly  false.  Any 
criterion  that  would  exclude  Mark  and  Luke  from  the  Evan^ 
gelists  must  be  rejected,  even  for  that  alone.  We  have  in 
series  weighed  these  several  criterions  and  found  them  want- 
ing, we  now  turn  to  the  CATHOLIC  CRITERION. 

This  criterion  is  no  other  than  the  Catholic  Church,  into 


8  CRITERION    OF    INSPIRATION. 

whose  custody  the  Holy  Writings  have  been  given.  The 
Church  as  an  organized  body  has  various  elements  and  agen- 
cies, which  functionate  to  teach  man  that  truth  which  the 
Redeemer  promised  should  be  taught  by  her  to  the  end  of 
time.  One  of  these  agencies  is  tradition,  which  is  simply  the 
solemn  witness  and  testimony  of  what  the  Church  taught  and 
believed  from  her  inception.  We  can  see,  at  a  glance,  that  the 
fountain  source  of  our  criterion  is  God  himself,  who,  as  the 
First  Cause,  wrought  this  effect  in  the  mind  of  the  writer. 
God  through  his  living  Magisterium  of  truth  tells  us  what  is 
Holy  Scripture,  and  what  is  not,  and  those  who  refuse  to  hear 
that  authoritative  voice  have  come  to  reject  even  the  Scriptures 
themselves.  Such  rejection  must  logically  follow  from  disbelief 
in  the  Church.  Augustine  was  never  truer  than  when  he  said : 
"  Were  it  not  that  the  Authority  of  the  Church  moved  me,  I 
would  not  believe  the  Gospels."  Rejecting  the  authority  of 
the  Church,  the  protestants  have  passed  through  a  wondrous 
transition.  Beginning  by  adoring  even  the  Masoretic  points, 
they  have  gradually  lapsed  to  such  a  point,  where  those  who 
believe  in  the  Bible  as  the  infallible  Word  of  God  are  the  ex- 
ceptions. It  excited  no  great  surprise  among  protestants,  when 
Dr.  Francis  L.  Patton  of  Princeton  University,  at  the  session  of 
the  Presbyterian  General  Assembly  in  1895,  gave  utterance  to 
the  following  views  :  "  It  is  enough  when  we  are  assured  that 
the  Bible  is  the  infallible  rule  of  faith  and  practice,  and  that  it 
is  given  by  inspiration  of  God.  This  question  can  not  be  ade- 
quately handled  by  quoting  proof  texts  out  of  the  Bible  to  prove 
its  inspiration.  It  involves  a  great  deal  more  than  some  sup- 
pose. Men  are  handling  a  very  large  topic  when,  under  the 
conditions  of  modern  thought,  they  ask.  What  is  the  Bible? 
What  does  it  mean  ?  How  did  this  great  literature  step  into 
the  place  it  holds,  and  by  what  right  does  it  claim  to  rule  the 
hearts  and  consciences  of  men  ?  I  have  great  faith  in  the  out- 
come of  this  discussion.  I  believe  that  we  shall  know  the  Bible, 
and  value  it  and  reverence  it  as  we  never  did  before.  But  I 
am  not,  I  can  not  be,  blind  to  the  fact  that  the  discussion  is  a 
broad  one  and  a  deep  one ;  that  it  involves  history  and  philosophy 
and  literary  criticism ;  that  it  was  inevitable ;  that  it  is  irre- 
pressible ;  that  it  could  not  have  come  earlier ;  that  it  could  not 
be  postponed.  The  attitude  which  men  are  taking  in  science, 
philosophy,  and  criticism  makes  it  a  foregone  conclusion  that  the 
Bible  must  be  subjected  to  the  critical  handling  that  is  the  subject 
of  to-day.'' 

The  literature  of  the  day  abounds  in  expressions  of  defec- 


CRITERION    OF    INSPIRATION.  9 

tion   in  faith  in  protestant  thought.      We  quote  the  follow- 
ing: 

Some  time  ago  Prof.  Samuel  Ives  Curtis  of  the  Congrega- 
tional Seminary  at  Chicago  read  a  paper  before  a  ministers' 
meeting  in  that  city  in  which  he  called  in  question  the  accur- 
acy of  the  generally  accepted  interpretation  of  certain  passages 
in  Isaiah  and  other  parts  of  the  Bible,  in  which  these  passages 
have  been  taken  to  prefigure  the  coming  of  the  Messiah.  More 
recently  Professor  Curtis  has  published  an  article  in  The  Bib- 
lical World,  a  periodical  conducted  under  the  auspices  of 
Chicago  University,  setting  forth  the  same  views. 

The  Interior  excerpts  the  following  paragraph  from  Prof. 
Ives'  article,  with  the  statement  that  it  had  been  "  absolutely 
incredulous  of  the  charge  that  such  views  were  held  by  any 
school  of  Christian  teaching,"  and  would  have  "  resented  the 
imputation  as  a  slander." 

"  The  Jews  in  the  times  of  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament 
held  erroneous  views  of  the  Messianic  prophecies  of  the  Old 
Testament.  It  was  next  to  impossible  for  the  New-Testament 
writers  to  free  themselves  from  these  errors,  and  they  did 
not  succeed  in  doing  so.  Even  if  they  could  have  done  so, 
they  had  a  motive  against  the  truth.  It  was  to  their  advan- 
tage to  employ  false  premises  in  order  to  make  a  popular 
argument.  They  even  went  beyond  this  and  employed  false 
etymology,  by  which  they  could  mislead  the  unlearned  into  the 
acceptance  of  Christ  by  twisting  a  passage  out  of  its  meaning 
to  make  it  prophetic." 

The  appointment  of  Dr.  Frederick  Temple  as  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury  is  taken  by  a  writer  in  The  Catholic  World 
(January)  as  a  total  surrender  by  the  Anglican  Church  to  the 
spirit  of  rationalism.  This  writer,  Jesse  Albert  Locke,  reviews 
Dr.  Temple's  views  as  expressed  years  ago  in  his  writings,  and 
makes  from  them  quotations  that  will  just  now  be  of  much 
interest  to  those  who  have  had  no  opportunity  to  examine  the 
writings  for  themselves.  Mr.  Locke  concedes  that  the  new 
archbishop  is  "a  man  conspicuous  for  ability  and  force  of 
character,"  that  "there  are  many  things  about  him  which  we 
must  all  admire" — naming  especially  his  consistent  advocacy 
of  temperance  and  total  abstinence,  and  his  assault  upon  the 
possession  by  private  persons  [as  private  property]  of  the  pre- 
sentation to  livings  in  the  Church  of  England.  But  Mr.  Locke 
has  no  words  of  approval  for  the  archbishop's  theology.  We 
quote  from  his  article  as  follows : 

"What  sort  of  theology  has  been  enthroned  at  Canterbury  ? 


10  CRITERION    OF    INSPIRATION. 

What  idea  of  religion  does  he  hold  and  teach  who  now  occu- 
pies what  Anglicans  like  to  call  '  the  chair  of  St.  Augustine  '  ?' 
Fortunately  for  our  inquiry  Dr.  Temple's  views  on  religion  are 
easily  accessible.  He  was  the  first  essayist  in  a  volume  pub- 
lished in  1861  and  entitled  '  Essays  and  Reviews.'  This  book 
was  the  signal  for  a  blaze  of  controversy.  Its  authors  were 
clergymen  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  its  teaching  was  the 
frankest,  boldest  rationalism,  which  emasculated  religion  of  the 
supernatural  and  reduced  it  to  a  purely  humanitarian  basis. 
Orthodox,  evangelical  protestants — pious  but  illogical — were 
deeply  shocked.  A  few  quotations  will  give  an  idea  of  what 
the  essayist  taught  on  some  important  subjects. 

"  Dr.  Temple,  in  his  opening  essay,  '  The  Education  of  the 
World,'  plants  himself  squarely  on  that  fundamental  protestant 
principle  of  which  rationalism  is  the  necessary  and  legitimate 
fruit.  The  ultimate  basis  for  religion,  he  claims,  is  to  be  found 
only  in  that  '  inner  voice '  which  should  guide  every  man. 
There  is  nothing  external  which  can  be  an  authority ;  neither 
is  the  church.  '  The  Bible,'  he  says,  *  in  fact  is  hindered  by  its 
form  from  exercising  a  despotism  over  the  human  spirit.  .  .  . 
This  it  does  by  the  principle  of  private  judgment  which  puts 
conscience  between  us  and  the  Bible,  making  conscience  the 
supreme  interpreter,  whom  it  may  be  a  duty  to  enlighten,  but 
whom  it  can  never  be  a  duty  to  disobey  '  Essays  and  Reviews,' 
p.  53).  Again:  'When  conscience  and  the  Bible  appear  to 
differ,  the  pious  Christian  immediately  concludes  that  he  has 
not  really  understood  the  Bible.'  That  is,  his  private  judgment 
is  certainly  right  and  the  Bible  must  be  made  to  conform  to  it  1 
This  reduces  religion  to  the  purest  individualism ;  makes  as 
many  different  religions  as  there  are  individuals  to  hold  them. 
And  all  are  equally  right !  Suppose  this  principle  applied  to 
the  law  of  the  land,  each  man  assuming  that  the  law  had  no 
other  interpreter  than  his  own  '  inner  voice ' !  " 

Mr.  Locke  then  gives  us  a  number  of  quotations  from  the 
essays  of  other  writers  in  the  same  volume  of  "  Essays  and  Re- 
views," and  tho'  the  "  usual  statement  "  was  found  in  the  pre- 
face, to  the  effect  that  each  essayist  was  reponsible  for  his  own 
essay  alone.  Dr.  Temple  has,  in  the  writer's  judgment,  made 
himself  responsible  for  the  views  of  these  other  writers  by  his 
failure  to  repudiate  them.  Some  of  these  other  essayists 
spoke  of  the  doctrine  of  inspiration  as  "  absurd,"  explained 
away  the  Messianic  prophecies,  characterizing  as  "  distortion  " 
the  application  of  Isaiah's  prophecies  to  the  Messiah,  and  up- 
held the  idea  of  a  true  national  church  as  one  that  should 


CRITERION    OF    INSPIRATION.  11 

include  all  the  people  of  the  nation,  who  should  be  born  into 
membership  in  the  church  as  they  are  born  into  civil  rights. 
"These  are  the  views,"  The  Catholic  World  writer  assumes, 
"  for  which  the  new  arcHbishop  stands."  He  then  proceeds 
to  quote  further  from  the  archbishop's  later  writings.  Refering 
to  his  Bampton  lectures,  1884,  Mr.  Locke  writes: 

"As  to  miracles,  those  of  the  Old  Testament,  he  tells  us, 
could  never  be  proved.  '  The  times  are  remote  ;  the  date  and 
authorship  of  the  books  are  not  established  with  certainty ;  the 
mixture  of  poetry  with  history  is  no  longer  capable  of  any  sure 
separation  into  its  parts '  (p.  206).  In  the  New  Testament,  he 
adds,  we  must  admit  that  some  unusual  occurrences  took  place 
which  struck  the  disciples  and  other  observers  as  miracles,  tho' 
they  need  not  necessarily  have  been  miracles  '  in  the  scientific 
sense.*  *  For  instance,  the  miraculous  healing  of  the  sick  may 
be  no  miracle  in  the  strictest  sense  at  all.  It  may  be  but  an 
instance  of  the  power  of  mind  over  body,  a  power  which  is 
undeniably  not  yet  brought  within  the  range  of  science,  and 
which  nevertheless  may  be  really  within  its  domain  '  (p.  195). 
Our  Lord's  miracles  of  healing  may  have  been  simply  the  result 
of  this  power  and  '  due  to  a  superiority  in  his  mental  power  to 
the  similar  power  possessed  by  other  men.  Men  seem  to 
possess  this  power  over  their  own  bodies  and  over  the  bodies 
of  others  in  different  degrees  '  (p.  201).  Even  our  Lord's  resur- 
rection from  the  dead  is  reached  by  this  destructive  criticism. 
'  Thus,  for  instance,  it  is  quite  possible  that  our  Lord's  resurrec- 
tion may  be  found  hereafter  to  be  no  miracle  at  all  in  the 
scientific  sense.  It  foreshadows  and  begins  the  general  resur- 
rection ;  when  that  general  resurrection  comes  we  may  find  that 
it  is,  after  all,  the  natural  issue  of  physical  laws  always  at  work ' 
(p.  196). 

"  If  we  ask,  What,  then,  can  be  the  object  of  miracles  ? 
Dr.  Temple  has  his  answer  ready.  If  these  events,  tho'  not 
really  miraculous,  have  'served  their  purpose,  if  they  have 
arrested  attention  which  would  not  otherwise  have  been 
arrested,  if  they  have  compelled  belief,'  then  they  have  accom- 
plished their  true  end.  In  other  words,  they  were  '  pious 
frauds '  impressing  a  people  naturally  credulous  and  easily 
deceived,  as  the  best  way  of  conveying  ethical  truth  to  them. 
The  protestant  tradition  persists  in  giving  to  the  Society  of 
Jesus  the  possession  of '  The  end  justifies  the  means '  as  a  prin- 
ciple of  conduct,  but  Dr.  Temple  goes  farther  still  and  carries 
the  charge  back  from  His  faithful  servants  to  the  great  Master 
Himself!" 


12  CRITERION    OF    INSPIRATION. 

For  these  views  of  the  new  archbishop,  says  Mr.  Locke,  the 
AngHcan  Church  must  be  held  responsible,  since  it  has  twice 
passed  in  review  of  them  and  refused  to  condemn  either  him 
or  them,  and  has  now  received  him  as  its  head. 

In  a  paraphrase  on  the  Book  of  Jonah,  Dr.  Lyman  Abbott 
of  Plymouth  Church,  Brooklyn,  resumes : 

"  This  is,  in  brief,  the  story  of  Jonah.  Such  scholars  as 
Ewald  and  Driver  regard  it  as  fiction,  not  because  of  the  miracle 
of  the  great  fish.  That  is  not  a  greater  miracle  than  others, 
not  so  great  as  some.  But,  in  the  whole  scope  and  spirit  and 
structure  of  the  story,  this  book  reads  to  these  scholars  like  a 
product,  not  merely  of  imagination,  but  of  Oriental  imagina- 
tion, not  merely  like  a  satire  but  almost  like  a  caricature.  Out- 
side of  ecclesiastical  circles  this  story  invariably  produces  a 
smile.  Might  not  this  suggest  that  it  was  intended  by  the 
author  to  produce  a  smile  ?  That  he  wrote  it  to  smite  with  ridi- 
cule that  narrowness  of  spirit,  that  religious  provincialism, 
which  is  more  amenable  to  ridicule  than  to  any  other  weapon? 
That  the  prophet  of  Jehovah  should  think  to  escape  from  his 
God  by  fleeing  from  the  province  of  Palestine  is  the  first  point 
in  this  satire ;  that  he  who  would  not  preach  to  pagans  is  com- 
pelled to  mingle  his  prayer  with  pagans  is  a  second  satire  ;  that 
pagan  sailors  should  do  their  utmost  to  save  a  prophet  of 
Jehovah  from  the  consequence  of  his  own  misdoing  is  a  third 
satire ;  that  he  should  be  angry  with  the  Lord  because  the  Lord 
is  gracious  to  Nineveh  is  a  fourth  satire ;  that  he  should  care 
for  his  gourd  and  himself,  and  not  for  Nineveh  and  its  thous- 
ands of  inhabitants,  is  a  fifth  satire.  And  over  against  this 
picture  of  ecclesiastical  narrowness  is  set  the  portrayal  of  God 
— who  saves  the  sailors,  saves  Jonah,  saves  Nineveh,  and  com- 
pels even  this  provincial  prophet  to  declare  of  Him  that  He  is 
'  a  gracious  God,  and  merciful,  slow  to  anger,  and  of  great  kind- 
ness, and  repentest  him  of  the  evil.'  " 

Rev.  Samuel  Eliot,  of  the  First  Unitarian  Church  of  Brook- 
lyn, criticizes  Dr.  Abbott  from  a  different  standpoint.  He 
personally  agrees  with  Dr.  Abbott,  and  honors  him  for  his  in- 
sight and  candor,  but  does  not  think  he  is  justified,  as  a  Con- 
gregational minister,  in  an  effort  to  overthrow  doctrines  for 
which  Congregationalism  has  always  stood.     He  says : 

"  I  can  not  help  thinking  that  straightforward  methods 
demand  that  the  men  of  the  liberal  orthodoxy  no  longer  remain 
within  the  orthodox  church.  They  are  in  a  false  position,  open- 
ing the  gates  of  the  citadel  to  all  forms  of  new  thought,  while 
apparently  defending  it.     Having  really  broken  with  the  old 


CRITERION    OF    INSPIRATION.  13 

tradition,  they  ought  to  be  brave  enough  to  break  also  with 
the  old  associations.  A  position  outside  of  the  orthodoxy  to 
which  they  still  outwardly  conform  would  vastly  increase  their 
power  for  good,  improve  their  reputation  for  honesty,  and 
make  them  worthier  champions  of  the  truth  that  makes  men 
free.  I  think  that  unconscious  insincerity  in  church  connec- 
tions is  one  of  the  most  serious  perils  of  the  Christian  Church. 
The  pressing  need  of  our  time  is  absolute  intellectual  honesty 
that  uses  no  ambiguous  phrases,  that  makes  no  mental  reserva- 
tions, but  dares  to  think  freely  and  to  speak  openly.  Having 
frankly  outgrown  the  dogmas  of  the  old  theology,  is  my  dear 
friend  and  neighbor,  Dr.  Abbott,  justified  in  remaining  within 
an  organization  which  still  nominally  supports  the  declarations 
of  the  ancient  creeds  ?  I  have  not  the  slightest  sympathy  with 
bigotry  or  heresy-hunting.  Old-fashioned  orthodoxy  seems  to 
me  a  monster  intellectual  error,  but  this  modern  liberal  ortho- 
doxy may  contain  a  moral  error.  Therefore  I  believe  that  the 
ministers  of  the  Manhattan  Association  are  honorable  and  con- 
sistent in  the  action  taken  by  them  at  their  meeting  yesterday." 
The  religious  journals  are  having  some  amusement  at  the 
expense  of  the  secular  press  over  the  serious  treatment  given 
by  the  latter  to  the  report  of  Dr.  James  M.  Buckley's  "heresy." 
At  a  recent  meeting  of  the  Methodist  preachers  in  and  around 
New  York  city.  Dr.  Buckley  (editor  of  The  Christian  Advocate), 
in  discussing  a  paper  read  by  Dr.  Curtis,  took  occasion  to  say 
that  there  were  not  four  men  in  the  room  who  believed  in  the 
infallibility  of  the  English  version  of  the  Scriptures.  The  state- 
ment being  challenged,  he  called  for  a  vote ;  but  the  meeting 
adjourned  without  its  being  taken. 

Prof.  Charles  A.  Briggs,  D.  D.,  whose  inaugural  address  a 
few  years  ago,  when  installed  in  the  chair  which  he  still  fills  in 
the  Union  Theological  Seminary,  had  such  an  important  bear- 
ing on  the  affairs  both  of  the  Seminary  and  the  Presbyterian 
Church,  handles  the  Old  Testament  with  at  least  as  much  free- 
dom as  that  displayed  by  Dr.  Lyman  Abbott  in  his  recent 
course  of  sermons.  Professor  Briggs  writes  in  the  latest  num- 
ber of  The  North  American  Review  on  "Works  of  the  Imagin- 
ation in  the  Old  Testament,"  and  six  pages  of  the  article  are 
devoted  to  the  book  of  Jonah,  the  conclusions  reached  being 
almost,  if  not  quite,  identical  with  those  for  which  Dr.  Abbott 
has  been  so  severely  criticised  in  the  last  few  weeks. 
Professor  Briggs  begins  his  article  as  follows : 
"  It  is  not  so  much  the  supernatural  power  in  the  miracle 
that  troubles  us  as  the  character  of  the  miracle.     There  is  in  it, 


14  CRITERION    OF    INSPIRATION. 

whatever  way  we  interpret  it,  the  element  of  the  extravagant 
and  the  grotesque.  The  divine  simplicity,  the  holy  sublimity, 
and  the  overpowering  grace  which  characterize  the  miracles  of 
Biblical  history  are  conspicuously  absent.  We  feel  that  there 
is  no  sufficient  reason  for  such  a  miracle,  and  we  instinctively 
shrink  from  it,  not  because  of  lack  of  faith  in  the  supernatural 
divine  power  of  working  miracles,  but  because  we  have  such  a 
faith  in  God's  grace  and  holiness  and  majesty  that  we  find  it 
cftflficult  to  believe  that  He  would  work  such  a  grotesque  and 
extravagant  miracle  as  that  described  in  the  story  of  the  great 
fish." 

The  wholesale  and  sudden  repentance  of  Nineveh  is  still 
more  marvelous.  Nothing  like  it  meets  us  in  the  history  of 
Israel  or  of  the  church.  Jesus  uses  it  for  illustration  because 
there  was  no  historic  repentance  so  well  suited  to  his  purpose. 
The  prayer  in  the  story  is  not  appropriate  unless  the  story  be 
considered  ideal.  This  prayer  is  a  mosaic  from  several  more 
ancient  psalms  and  prophecies,  used  by  the  author  as  appro- 
priate to  his  story. 

As  for  the  reference  made  to  the  story  by  Jesus,  Professor 
Briggs  speaks  as  follows : 

"  It  is  objected  that  Jesus  in  his  use  of  Jonah  gives  sanction 
to  the  historicity  of  the  story.  But  this  objection  has  little 
weight ;  for  we  have  seen  that  his  method  of  instruction  was  in 
the  use  of  stories  of  his  own  composition.  We  ought  not  to 
be  surprised,  therefore,  that  he  should  use  such  stories  from  the 
Old  Testament  likewise. 

"  It  is  urged  that  Jesus  makes  such  a  realistic  use  of  it  that 
it  compels  us  to  think  that  he  regarded  it  as  real.  But  in  fact 
he  does  not  make  a  more  realistic  use  of  Jonah  than  he  does  of 
the  story  of  Dives  and  Lazarus. 

"  Paul  makes  just  as  realistic  a  use  of  the  story  of  Jannes 
and  Jambres  withstanding  Moses  ;  and  compares  them  with  the 
foes  of  Jesus  in  his  times  (2  Tim.  iii.  8.) 

"And  Jude  makes  just  as  realistic  a  use  of  Michael,  the 
archangel,  contending  with  the  devil,  and  disputing  about  the 
body  of  Moses,  and  compares  this  dispute  with  the  railers  of 
his  time  (Jude  9). 

"  These  stories  by  Paul  and  Jude  are  from  the  Jewish  Hag- 
gada,  and  not  from  the  Old  Testament.  No  scholar  regards 
them  as  historic  events.  If  apostles  could  use  the  stories  of 
the  Jewish  Haggada  in  this  way,  why  should  not  Jesus  use 
stories  from  the  Old  Testament?  Jesus  uses  the  story  of 
Jonah  just  as  the  author  of  the  book  used  it,  to  point  import- 


CRITERION    OF    INSPIRATION.  16 

ant  religious  instruction  to  the  men  of  his  time.  Indeed  Jesus's 
use  of  it  rather  favors  the  interpretation  of  it  as  symboHc.  For 
it  is  just  this  symbohsm  that  the  fish  represents  Sheol,  the 
swallowing  up  death,  the  casting  forth,  resurrection,  that  we 
have  seen  in  the  story  of  Jonah  interpreted  by  the  prayer, 
which  makes  the  story  appropriate  to  symbolize  the  death  and 
resurrection  of  Jesus." 

Speaking  of  the  lesson  of  the  book — the  triumph  of  divine 
grace,  in  the  salvation  of  Nineveh,  over  the  sentence  of  judg- 
ment uttered  by  Jonah — Professor  Briggs  has  this  to  say : 

"Jonah  represents  only  too  well  the  Jew  of  Nehemiah's 
time,  the  Jew  of  the  New  Testament  times,  and  also  the  Chris- 
tian Church  in  its  prevailing  attitude  to  the  heathen  world.  If 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church  had  learned  the  lesson  of  Jonah, 
its  theologians  would  not  so  generally  have  consigned  the  un- 
baptized  heathen  world  to  hell-fire.  If  the  Reformers  had 
understood  Jonah  there  would  have  been  more  of  them  than 
Zwingli  and  Coelus  Secundus  Curio,  who  thought  that  there 
were  some  redeemed  heathen.  If  the  Westminster  divines  had 
understood  Jonah  they  never  would  have  coined  those  remark- 
able statements  of  the  tenth  chapter  of  their  Confession,  in 
which  the  entire  heathen  world  and  their  babes  are  left  out  of 
the  election  of  grace.  The  present  century,  brought  face  to 
face  with  the  heathen  world,  is  beginning  to  learn  the  lesson  of 
Jonah.  Jonah  is  the  book  for  our  times.  Tho'  written  many 
centuries  ago  as  a  beautiful  ideal  of  the  imagination  to  teach 
the  wonderful  grace  of  God  in  the  salvation  of  repenting 
heathen  and  their  babes,  it  has  been  reserved  for  the  present 
age  to  apprehend  and  apply  its  wonderful  lessons.  The  repent- 
ance of  Nineveh  is  a  prophetic  ideal." 

The  affinity  between  protestant  and  rationalist  daily  grows 
closer. 

Although  tradition  would  be  worthless  as  a  motive  of 
credibility,  if  separated  from  the  Church's  infallible  authority ; 
in  her  hands,  and  under  her  guidance,  it  becomes  an  important 
factor  in  her  means  of  teaching.  The  testimonies  of  the  Fath- 
ers are  not  so  much  valuable  for  their  critical  authority^  as  for 
their  simple  witness  of  what  the  Church  believed  in  their  time. 
The  Fathers  are,  in  the  Church,  what  the  arteries  are  in  the 
human  organism,  avenues  whither  the  blood  is  propelled  from 
the  great  centre  to  vitalize  every  part. 

Many  writers  on  Holy  Scripture  adduce  the  testimonies  of 
the  New  Testament  as  a  means  of  certitude  of  the  deposit  of 
Holy  Scripture.     The  chief  text  brought  forth  to  substantiate 


m: 


16  CRITERION    OF    INSPIRATION. 

such  position  is  from  the  second  epistle  of  St.  Paul  to  Timothy 
III,  i6.  The  passage,  according  to  the  Greek  is  as  follows: 
"Ilao-a  jpaipT)  deoirvevrao^^  kuI  ox^eXt/AO?  tt/uo?  8i,8aa-Ka\.{av,7rpo<i 
eke'^'Xpv,  7rp6<;  eiravopdmatv,  7rpb<;  traiheiav  ttjv  iv  hiKaLoavvr]" 

The  Vulgate  renders  the  passage:  "  Omnis  scriptura  divini- 
tus  inspirata  utilis  est  ad  docendum,  ad  arguendum,  ad  corri- 
piendum,  ad  erudiendum  in  justitia."  The  Roman  Catholic 
version  is  in  accord  with  the  vulgate  :  "All  Scripture  inspired 
of  God  is  profitable  to  teach,  to  reprove,  to  correct,  to  instruct 
in  justice."  It  is  evident  from  a  scrutiny  of  the  Greek  text 
that  the  Vulgate  does  not  adequately  reproduce  it.  No  account 
is  taken  in  such  version  of  the  /cat,  which  however  appears  in 
all  the  best  codices.  The  Vulgate  expunging  koI^  would  vir- 
tually insert  the  elliptical  ean  after  dxfjeXifio^,  thus  making 
deoTTveva-To^  a  qualifying  characteristic,  warranting  the  predica- 
tion of  a(f)€\ifJbo<;,  of  irdaa  <ypa^r).  By  the  expunging  of  the 
important  particle  koI,  such  sense  can  be  gleaned  from  this 
passage;  but,  retaining  such  conjunction,  whose  presence  rests 
upon  the  best  data,  I  am  at  a  loss  to  understand  how  they 
gather  the  meaning.  Moreover,  the  context  and  parallel  pas- 
sages demand  the  sense  which  results  from  the  retaining  of  the 
particle. 

Of  all  the  versions,  the  Ethiopic  comes  closest  to  the  orig- 
inal. According  to  the  Latin  translation  of  the  Ethiopic  text 
by  Walton,  it  is  as  follows  :  "  Et  tota  scriptura  per  Spiritum 
Dei  est,  et  prodest  in  omni  doctrina  et  eruditione  ad  corrigen- 
dum et  instruendum  in  veritate."  Although  this  ancient  and 
valued  text  departs  somewhat  from  the  verbally  literal  trans- 
lation, it  reproduces  the  full  sense.  We  could  perhaps  literally 
translate  the  Greek  :  "  All  Scripture  is  divinely  inspired  and 
useful  to  teach,  to  reprove,  to  correct,  to  instruct  in  righteous- 
ness." Thus  it  is  in  conformity  with  the  Greek  reading,  with 
the  Ethiopic,  with  the  context,  with  other  parallel  passages, 
and  with  some  of  the  best  of  the  Fathers.  We  may  instance 
one  parallel  passage  :     II  Pet.  I,  20 — 21. 

We  think  then  that  this  sense  is  suflficiently  evidenced  so  as 
to  become  practically  certain.  The  passage  thus  becomes  a 
direct  testimony  for  the  influence  of  God  on  Holy  Scripture. 
Indeed,  Paul's  motive  is  to  induce  Timothy  to  entertain  a 
divine  regard  for  the  Holy  Writ,  and,  for  this  reason,  brings 
forward,  as  the  Causal  ratio,  the  divine  element  in  all  Scripture. 
It  is  not  then  a  discriminative,  conditional  proposition,  but  a 
plain  assertion  of  the  Authorship  of  God  in  the  Holy  Scrip- 


NATURE   OF   INSPIRATION.  17 

ture.  But  this  clear  text  may  not  be  adduced  with  any  profit 
as  a  criterion  ;  because,  first  of  all,  it  is,  as  Perrone  says,  begging 
the  question  to  prove  the  divinity  of  the  Holy  Books  from 
their  own  testimony.  It  is  the  circulus  vitiosus.  Again,  even 
to  those  who  grant  the  divine  authority  of  the  Epistle  to 
Timothy,  it  only  avails  to  prove  the  impress  of  the  hand  of 
God  on  Holy  Scripture  in  a  general  way,  but  does  not  distin- 
guish book  from  book,  or  form  any  judgment  concerning  an 
official  Catalogue.  We  grant  then  that  the  text,  as  well  as 
others  of  a  similar  nature,  operates  to  prove  the  divine  impulse 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  on  Scripture  in  general,  provided  we  once 
have  received  as  granted  that  these  books  are  of  God,  but  we 
deny  to  all  such  texts  any  value  to  discern  canonical  from  un- 
canonical   books. 

There  remains  then  one  means,  and  one  means  only,  to  teach 
man  not  only  the  truths  of  Scripture,  but  also  the  Scripture  of 
truths.  This  means  is  the  voice  of  God  through  the  Church. 
The  Church  must  teach  us  two  things  ;  what  books  are  of  God  ; 
and  what  influence  God  had  in  such  books.  We  shall  treat  first 
of  God's  influence  upon  the  Holy  Books ;  and,  secondly,  of  the 
official  list  of  those  books.  As  it  is  well  to  know  the  nature  of 
the  thing  sought,  before  going  in  quest  of  it,  so  we  believe  that 
we  shall  be  aided  in  constructing  the  list  of  books  of  Holy 
Scripture  by  a  knowledge  of  the  distinguishing  element  required 
in  them,  before  admitting  them  to  such  list.  Our  treatise  will 
deal  first,  therefore,  with  the  NATURE  AND  EXTENT  OF  INSPI- 
RATION, and  secondly,  with  The  Canon. 

Chapter  II. 

Nature  of  Inspiration. 

In  common  parlance,  revelation  and  inspiration  are  convert- 
ible terms,  but,  in  reality,  they  differ  greatly.  Revelation,  from 
revelare,  means  to  uncover,  unveil,  disclose  to  the  view  some- 
thing hidden,  and,  in  the  present  instance,  to  make  known  to 
the  mind  a  concept  not  before  known.  This  took  place  with 
the  Prophets,  and  in  every  portion  of  the  Holy  Writings  where 
the  truths  enunciated  were  impervious  to  the  human  under 
standing,  or  depended  on  the  free  will  of  God  ;  in  fact,  wherever 
the  idea  portrayed  was  not  acquired  by  the  industry  and  labor 
of  the  writer.  When,  therefore,  the  writer  gives  forth  truths 
which  he  had  acquired  by  the  ordinary  method  of  human 
research  and  observation,  there  is  no  revelation  from  God  re- 
quisite or  given.     Thus  St.  Luke  tells  us  that,  "  it  had  seemed 


18  NATURE  OF  INSPIRATION. 

good  to  him,  who  had  followed  studiously  all  things  from  the 
beginning,  to  write  in  order  these  things."  Thus  the  author  of 
the  II.  Book  of  Maccabees  testifies,  Cap.  II.  24 — 27:  "And 
thus  the  things  that  were  comprised  by  Jason  the  Cyrenean  in: 
five  volumes,  we  have  attempted  to  compendiate  in  one  volume. 
We  who  have  undertaken  to  compendiate  this  work,  have  taken 
upon  ourselves  a  task  abounding  in  vigils  and  sweat."  This 
book  then  is  not,  properly  speaking,  revealed.  But  usage  has 
prevailed  and  prevails  to  speak  of  the  whole  body  of  the  Scrip- 
tures as  revealed  writings,  and  we  do  not  wish  to  correct  this 
usage,  but  only  to  define  and  fix  our  terms  for  the  greater  facil- 
ity of  our  treatise.  Inspiration  then  pervades  the  whole  struc- 
ture of  Scripture:  it  is  its  formal  principle,  its  soul ;  revelation 
is  only  called  in,  as  we  have  said,  where  the  writer  could  not,  or, 
de  facto,  did  not  acquire  his  knowledge  in  the  ordinary  manner. 

This  distinction  is  of  great  moment,  as  many  difficulties  are 
solved  by  the  same.  The  neglect  of  this  distinction  gave  rise 
to  a  censure  of  one  of  the  propositions  of  the  famous  Leon 
Lessius,  which,  had  it  been  couched  in  precise  terms,  would 
have  challenged  contradiction.  The  Holy  Ghost,  then,  is  the 
directing  and  impelling  agent  in  all  the  Scripture,  but  not  in 
the  same  manner.  He  discloses  the  truths  unknown  before  in 
revelation  ;  he  impels  to  write  infallibly  the  things  which  God 
would  communicate  to  man  in  inspiration.  We  have  defined 
above  the  concept  of  inspiration ;  we  shall  now  scrutinize  more 
closely  its  object  and  extent.  The  Vatican  Council  has  given 
us  a  definition  which  will  serve  as  our  guide  in  dealing  with  the 
present  subject,  for,  as  we  have  proven  above,  the  Church  can 
be  the  only  guide  in  such  a  question. 

In  Cap.  II,  De  Revel,  we  find : 

"  Qui  quidem  veteris  et  novi  Testamenti  libri  integri  cum 
omnibus  suis  partibus,  prout  in  ejusdem  Concilii  decreto  recen- 
sentur,  et  in  veteri  vulgata  latina  editione  habentur,  pro  sacris 
et  canonicis  suscipiendi  sunt.  Eos  vero  Ecclesia  pro  sacris  et 
canonicis  habet,  non  ideo  quod  sola  humana  industria  concin- 
nati,  sua  deinde  auctoritate  sint  approbati ;  nee  ideo  dumtaxat, 
quod  revelationem  sine  errore  contineant ;  sed  propterea  quod 
Spiritu  Sancto  inspirante  conscripti  Deum  habent  auctorem, 
atque  ut  tales  ipsi  Ecclesiae  traditi  sunt."  And  in  Canon  IV, 
De  Revelatione : 

"  Si  quis  sacrse  Scripturae  libros  integros  cum  omnibus  suis 
partibus,  prout  illos  sancta  Tridentina  Synodus  recensuit,  pro 
sacris  et  canonicis  non  susceperit,  aut  eos  divinitus  inspiratos 
esse  negaverit ;  anathema  sit." 


NATURE  OF  INSPIRATION.  19 

Hence  it  is  of  faith  that  God  is  the  AUTHOR  of  the  Sacred 
Scriptures,  and  of  the  integral  books  with  all  their  parts.  It  is 
not  here  asserted  that  God  with  his  own  hand  wrote  the  books 
materially,  but  that  he  \s  the  auctor  principalis  per  conscriptores 
suos.  Now,  we  will  bear  in  mind  the  relation  of  the  author  to 
his  work,  in  weighing  and  judging  of  the  correctness  or  false- 
ness of  opinions  which  deal  with  this  subject. 

Inspirare  is  the  Latin  equivalent  for  the  Greek  Oeoirveveiv, 
which  word  S.  Paul  uses  in  his  II  Epist.  to  Tim.  Ill,  i6., 
^^iraaa  jpa<f)r}  Oeoirvevaro'i" .  It  signifies  that  one  is  impelled 
by  God,  that  the  Spirit  of  God  is  in  him,  moving  him  to  action 
and  guiding  him  in  that  action.  Hence,  God  is  the  principal 
author,  the  principal  cause ;  and  the  inspired  agent  is  the  in- 
strumental cause. 

In  every  action  wrought  by  a  creature,  there  is  a  concursus 
of  two  causes,  the  causa  prima,  and  the  causa  secunda ;  the 
Creator  and  the  Creature.  We  exist  by  reflected  existence,  as 
the  moon  shines  by  reflected  light.  The  same  act,  which 
brought  us  into  being  at  our  creation,  preserves  us  in  that  be- 
ing, and  this  is  what  is  called  the  conservatio  in  esse ;  and  the 
conservative  act  is  all  that  prevents  us  from  relapsing  into  the 
primal  absolute  chaos.  God  must  then  cooperate  with  his 
creature  in  every  act,  for  the  second  cause  must  depend  on  the 
First  Cause  essentially^  and,  therefore,  in  every  act,  it  must  be 
upheld  by  the  conservative  power  of  God.  This  cooperation  of 
the  First  Cause  is  called  the  Concursus  Generalis,  and  is  found 
even  in  acts  which  are  morally  bad.  The  murderer  and  the  in- 
cestuous receives  the  conservatio  in  esse  in  his  act,  without 
thereby  making  the  crime  imputable  to  God,  for  man's  will  is 
free  ;  God  preserves  him  in  his  being,  but  gives  him  the  free 
will  to  do  right  or  wrong  ;  nay  more,  God  calls,  assists,  urges  to 
do  right;  but,  if  the  second  agent  wishes  to  do  wrong,  God  does 
not  withdraw  his  "conservatio  in  esse  ".  He  does  not  necessi- 
tate virtue  nor  eliminate  vice ;  for  he  made  his  creature  free. 
This  then  is  the  concursus  of  the  First  and  second  cause  in 
every  act.  But  there  are  certain  acts  where  this  concursus  is 
more  marked  and  potent  on  the  part  of  the  Creator,  and  Inspir- 
ation is  one  of  these  acts. 

It  is  declared  in  the  definition  of  the  Vatican  Council  that 
God  is  the  Author  of  the  books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments 
with  all  their  parts.  We  also  assert  and  prove  that  the  various 
inspired  writers  were  authors  of  the  respective  books  which 
history  and  tradition  attribute  to  them.     Therefore,  there  is  a 


20  NATURE   OF   INSPIRATION. 

concursus  of  two  causes  here,  of  two  authors.  A  book  maybe 
defined  to  be  a  "Contextus  Sententiarum  seu  sensuum  scripto 
consignatus  ".  We  here  denominate  book,  every  complete  com- 
ponent factor  of  the  Old  or  New  Testaments,  even  though  it 
consist  of  but  a  few  sentences,  as  for  instance  the  Epistle  to 
Philemon,  consisting  of  but  25  verses,  comprised  in  one  chap- 
ter. In  every  book  or  writing,  there  are  two  elements,  the 
material  and  the  formal  element.  The  formal  element  com- 
prises the  "  Complexus  "  of  ideas  and  judgments  signified  by 
the  words  and  propositions  in  the  book.  These  by  some  are 
called  the  "res  et  sententiae";  by  others,  the  "sensa";  by 
Franzelin,  the  "  Veritates  ".  The  material  element  of  the  book, 
"  in  fieriy  is  the  consigning  of  these  veritates  to  writing.  The 
author  of  a  book  needs  not  necessarily  consign  the  veritates  to 
writing.  St.  Paul  employed  an  amanuensis  to  commit  his 
teachings  to  writing  in  his  Epistles,  and,  yet,  he  is  their  author. 
It  is  the  creations  of  the  soul  reflected  in  a  work  that  denomi- 
nate an  agent  an  author.  Any  hand  may  do  the  material 
work,  but  the  mind  back  of  the  truths  is  the  factor  to  which  is 
rightly  attributable  the  authorship. 

When  we,  therefore,  assert  for  God  the  authorship  of  the 
Scriptures,  we  do  not  mean  to  say  that  he  consigned  the  ideas 
to  writing  with  his  own  hand,  but  that  he  was  the  formal  cause 
of  the  "  res  et  sententiae,"  of  the  "  sensa,"  of  the  "  veritates." 
Now  the  relation  of  an  author  to  his  work  is  to  be  measured 
by  the  object  of  the  work.  In  a  rhetorical  or  poetical  work, 
the  words  and  style  would  be  "per  se  intenta."  They  would 
be  in  the  formal  ratio  of  the  work,  and,  consequently,  the  work 
could  not  be  called  the  creation  of  any  certain  author,  unless 
he  had  per  se  produced  such  beauty  of  diction.  But  in  a  book 
whose  scope  was  to  convey  truth  to  the  mind,  and  naught 
else,  the  style  or  the  selection  of  the  words  would  not  neces- 
sarily need  be  the  effect  of  the  author  principalis.  Provided 
they  be  adequate  and  fitting  to  convey  the  truths  which  he 
might  wish  to  impart,  the  book  can  attain  its  end,  even  though 
the  principal  cause  have  no  special  influence  in  the  selection  of 
words  or  the  style.  Now,  it  is  evident  that  no  being  can  be 
termed  the  author  of  a  book,  unless  he  produces  the  formal 
element  of  the  book.  God  is  the  author  of  all  the  books  of 
Scripture,  and,  therefore,  he  produced  all  the  "  veritates,"  or 
"res  et  sententiae"  therein  contained.  These  are  true  and  in- 
spired; the  other  part  may  be  defective.  God  produced  these 
"  res  et  sententiae  "  either  by  revelation  or  by  inspiration  ;  by 
revelation,  if  the  truths  were  impervious  to  human  reason,  such 


NATURE   OF   INSPIRATION.  21 

as  fiitura  contingentia,  mysteries,  or  any  other  truth  which  the 
writer  could  not  acquire  by  natural  means :  by  inspiration 
always,  illumining  the  mind  and  moving  the  will  to  write  all 
those  things  and  only  those  things  which  God  wished  to  com- 
municate to  his  creature,  whether  those  things  were  then  for 
the  first  time  known  by  revelation,  or  were  the  acquisitions  of 
human  industry  and  observation.  For  even  in  this  latter  case, 
the  special  action  of  God  is  necessary  to  impel  the  writer  to 
write  all  and  only  the  things  which  God  wishes  written,  and  to 
write  them  infallibly,  without  mixture  of  error. 

We  see  thus  that  there  is  always  a  greater  concursus  than 
the  concursus  generalis  in  inspiration.  God  does  for  the  in- 
spired writer  more  than  "  conservare  in  esse."  He  is  the  im- 
pelling power  within  him.  Sometimes,  as  was  the  case  with 
the  Prophets,  the  second  agent  is  thrown  into  an  ecstacy,  and 
his  mind  is  imbued  with  ideas,  in  the  creation  of  which  he  is 
only  the  passive  agent.  The  inspired  writer  is  vivo  IIi'ev/x.aTO? 
*A.<yCov  ^€p6fievo<;,  borne  on,  impelled  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  Not 
always  is  this  impelling  force  active  in  the  same  way.  It  is 
different  in  prophecy  than  it  is  in  the  inspiration  which  guided 
the  Evangelists  in  infallibly  committing  to  writing  things  to 
which  they  had  been  eye-witnesses.  Inspiration  does  not  pre- 
clude the  examining  of  existing  documents,  the  patient  toil  and 
research  which  always  accompanies  the  natural  acquisition  of 
knowledge.  Moses  may  have  made  use  of  existing  documents, 
when  giving  an  account  of  Creation.  But  the  certainty  of  in- 
spiration is  not  measured  by  the  certainty  of  these  existing 
documents,  nor  by  the  certainty  of  fallible  human  observation 
and  research.  Always  the  hand  of  God  is  there,  guiding,  and 
positively  influencing  the  agent  to  write  all  those  things,  and  only 
those  things  which  God  would  have  written  ;  and  this  assistance 
is  not  merely  a  negative  one,  but  a  positive  act  exercised  in 
every  concept  of  Holy  Writ.  Such  is  the  relation  of  an  author 
to  his  work,  and  we  know  by  divine  faith  that  God  is  the 
Author  of  the  Holy  Scriptures. 

Having  thus  established  this  relation  of  God  to  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  we  pass  to  consider  the  effect  of  this  relation  on  the 
Holy  Writ,  that  is,  we  consider  here  the  Extent  OF  INSPIRA- 
TION. 

Chapter  III. 
Extent  of  Inspiration. 

On  this  subject  there  have  been  many  different  opinions. 
Up  to  the  time  of  Lessius  (born  1554),  Verbal  Inspiration  was 


22  EXTENT   OF   INSPIRATION. 

quite  generally  admitted.  This  opinion  sustained  that  the 
material  words  were  the  work  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  some 
extended  it  even  to  the  dotting  of  the  letters,  and  other  such 
minutiae.  Lessius  having  entered  the  Jesuit  Order,  and  having 
been  appointed  Professor  of  Theology  at  Louvain  from  1585 
to  1605  ;  he,  in  concert  with  Du  Hamel,  his  confrere,  published 
certain  theses,  among  which  were  the  three  following : 

I. — "  Inspiratio  non  se  extendit  ad  omnia  verba  divinae 
Scripturae." 

2. — "  Divina  Inspiratio  non  se  extendit  ad  omnes  sententias 
divinae  Scripturae,  sed  Auctor  inspiratus  potest  scribere  ea  quae 
aliunde  noverit." 

3. — "  Liber  aliquis,  qualis  est  fortasse  secundus  Maccabae- 
orum,  humana  industria,  sine  assistentia  Spiritus  Sancti  scriptus 
si  Spiritus  Sanctus  postea,  testatur  ibi  nihil  esse  falsum,  efificitur 
Scriptura  sacra." 

Lessius  was  condemned  by  the  Universities  of  Louvain  and 
Douay,  but  Stapleton  the  famous  professor  of  Louvain  defended 
him.  Called  to  defend  himself,  Lessius  explained  his  doctrine, 
in  relation  to  the  second  and  third  proposition.  He  declared 
that  he  did  not  exclude  the  positive  influence  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  in  the  writings,  but  wished  to  assert  that  the  inspiring 
power  so  acted  on  the  second  agent,  as  to  leave  him  the  free 
use  of  his  memory  and  other  intellectual  powers,  whose  use  the 
Holy  Ghost  presupposed.  In  relation  to  the  third  proposition, 
he  defended  that  he  did  not  wish  to  assert  such  action  of  any 
particular  book ;  neither  did  he  mention  the  2nd  of  Maccabees 
as  an  example  of  such  action  ;  but,  simply,  he  meant  theoret- 
ically to  assert  such  possibility.  Pace  tanti  viri,  I  would  call 
this  a  subterfuge.  However,  we  are  not  dealing  with  possibili- 
ties, but  with  realities.  To  assert  that  such  were  the  inspiration 
which  actuated  any  of  the  books  of  our  Holy  Scriptures  is  con- 
demned by  the  Vatican  Council ;  while,  of  the  possibility,  the 
council  says  nothing.  We  shall  now  examine  every  one  of 
these  propositions  in  detail.  The  first  marks  a  new  era  in  theo- 
logical opinion,  in  relation  to  Holy  Scripture.  As  we  have 
said,  up  to  this  time,  verbal  inspiration  had  been  generally  held 
by  all.  From  Lessius'  time,  there  was  a  gradual  abandonment 
of  this  idea,  a  gradual  trend  to  the  opposite,  until  now  verbal 
inspiration  is  held  by  none  who  merits  aught  for  his  authority. 
And,  indeed,  it  is  patent  to  him  who  considers,  that  verbal  in- 
spiration could  not  have  taken  place. 

I. — God  does  not  operate  out  of  the  ordinary  course  of 
nature,  unless  for  necessary  or  useful  reasons.     Now  the  choice 


EXTENT   OF   INSPIRATION.  23 

of  words  and  the  style  of  the  discourse  needed  not  the  direct 
intervention  of  God,  but  could  be  adequately  accomplished  by 
the  ordinary  faculties  of  the  writer.  In  the  words  of  Marchini, 
De  Div.  et  Can.  Sac.  Bibliorum,  pag.  84:  "  Dici  nequit  a  Spi- 
ritu  Sancto  ademptum  fuisse  Apostolis  aut  Prophetis,  rationis, 
memoriae,  judicii  usum  ;  hsec  igitur  omnia  scribendo  adhibu- 
erunt."  Another  proof  for  the  thesis  under  consideration  is 
found  in  the  variety  of  style  prevailing  among  the  different 
authors.  Isaiah  is  polished  and  cultured  in  his  diction  ;  Jere- 
mias,  on  the  contrary,  and  Amos  are  less  polished  and  coarser 
in  their  style.  Isaias  was  in  high  social  rank,  while  Jeremias 
was  a  burgher  from  Anatoth,  and  Amos,  a  cowherd.''*'  And 
differences  of  style  exist  among  all  the  inspired  writers,  due  to 
their  different  characteristics.  No  one  can  fail  to  detect  the 
sublimity  of  conception  in  St.  John  over  the  other  Evangelists  ; 
and  the  massive  genius  of  St.  Paul  gleams  forth  in  those  inim- 
itable Epistles,  which  have  been  and  are  the  great  treasure  of 
the  Christian  religion.  Now,  if  the  Holy  Ghost  had  inspired 
the  very  words,  such  differences  could  not  exist. 

2. — Moreover,  in  the  Original  text  of  the  new  Testament 
barbarisms  and  violations  against  the  Greek  language  exist. 
Can  we,  for  a  moment  believe  that  the  Holy  Spirit,  inspired 
these  also  ? 

3. — In  the  Scriptures,  sometimes  the  same  fact  is  related  by 
different  writers  in  different  ways.  For  instance,  the  consecra- 
tion of  the  chalice  is  related  in  four  different  ways  by  St.  Math., 
XXVI,  28;  St.  Mark,  XIV,  24;  St.  Luke.  XXII,  20,  and  St. 
Paul,  I.  Cor.  XL,  25.  These  speak  of  the  same  words  of  Christ, 
as  he  used  them  once  for  all  at  the  Last  Supper.  If  the  Holy 
Ghost  had  inspired  the  words,  how  could  we  account  for  these 
divergencies  ?  Here  applies  aptly  what  St.  Augustine  said  of 
the  inspired  writers  :  "  Ut  quisque  meminerat  eos  explicasse 
manifestum  est." 

4. — Again,  the  author  of  the  second  book  of  Maccabees 
dates  certain  events  differently  from  the  manner  in  which  they 
are  dated  by  the  author  of  the  first  book:  II.  Maccab.  XI,  21, 
33,  38  ;  XII,  I  ;  XIV,  4,  date  certain  events  in  the  148th,  149th 

*Very  little  that  is  certain  is  known  of  the  life  of  Isaiah.  According 
to  the  Rabbis  he  was  of  the  tribe  of  Juda,  and  of  the  gens  Davidica, 
They  make  Amos  the  father  of  Isaiah,  the  brother  of  Amasia,  the  King 
of  Juda.  Some  of  the  fathers  have  received  this  opinion  from  the  Rabbis ; 
and  Jerome  himself  calls  Isaiah  a  vir  nohilis.  But  there  is  nothing  trust- 
worthy to  prove  that  he  was  of  the  royal  line.  His  style  gives  evidence 
of  his  liberal  education  and  may  well  be  called  regal,  but  we  have  noth- 
ing to  warrant  that  his  blood  was  of  the  kingly  line. 


24  EXTENT   OF   INSPIRATION. 

and  150th  year  of  the  era  of  the  Seleucidae ;  while  the  author 
of  the  first  book  places  the  events,  I.  Maccab.  VI,  16,  20 ;  VII, 
I,  in  the  149th,  150th,  151th  year,  one  year  later.  There  is  no 
contradiction ;  but  the  inspired  writers,  making  use  of  the  liberty 
which  God  allows  them,  depart  from  a  different  point  of  de- 
parture. 

5. — The  writers  of  the  New  Testament  rarely  or  never  quote 
the  Old  Testament  literally,  but  only  the  sense.  In  the  words 
of  St.  Jerome:  "Hoc  in  omnibus  pene  testimoniis  quae  de 
veteribus  libris  in  novo  assumpta  sunt  Testamento  observare 
debemus,  quod  memoriae  crediderint  Evangelistae  vel  Apostoli, 
et  tantum,  sensu  explicato,  saepe  ordinem  commutaverint,  non- 
nunquam  vel  detraxerint  verba  vel  addiderint."  Comment,  in 
Epist.  ad  Galatas. 

6. — The  inspired  writers  themselves  disclaim  verbal  inspira- 
tion, asserting  that  their  compositions  had  been  the  result  of 
toil,  observation  and  research.  The  text  of  II.  Maccab. 
already  quoted  is  an  example  of  this.  Also  the  preface  of  the 
Gospel  of  St.  Luke,  and  various  other  passages.  Now,  if  the 
inspiration  had  been  verbal,  this  labor  and  research  would  be 
inconceivable.  Again,  the  writer  of  the  second  book  of 
Maccab.  XV,  39,  in  closing  his  work,  speaks  thus  of  his  work : 
*'  I  also  with  these  things,  will  draw  my  discourse  to  an  end. 
And  if  (I  have  written)  well,  and  as  is  befitting  history,  this  I 
would  wish  ;  if  only  weakly  and  commonly,  /Lterptft)?,  mediocriter, 
(not  above  the  average)  this  is  all  I  could  achieve,  etc."  No 
such  apology  for  shortcomings  were  necessary,  had  the  Holy 
Ghost  inspired  the  words. 

7. — Furthermore,  if  the  inspiration  extended  to  the  words, 
either  of  two  things  must  be  true ;  either  the  translations  of 
the  original  texts  would  be  also  verbally  inspired,  or  we,  who 
do  not  make  use  of  the  original  texts,  would  not  have  the  true 
word  of  God.  The  first  hypothesis  is  absurd,  and  broached  by 
none;  the  second  is  false,  for  the  Church,  with  unerring  judg- 
ment, proclaims  that  she  has  the  word  of  God  in  the  Vulgate. 
Therefore,  the  inspiration  consists  in  the  sense  not  in  the 
material  word  ;  in  the  res  et  veritates,  not  in  the  sound  ;  and  the 
word  of  God  becomes  the  patrimony  of  the  whole  Church, 
through  the  different  versions,  of  whose  correctness  the  Church 
judges. 

In  general,  the  greater  part  of  the  Fathers  spoke  of  the 
Scriptures  as  verbally  inspired,  but  this  was  owing  to  the  fact 
that  the  question  was  not  studied  ex  professo,  and  they  spoke 
oratorically.      St.  John  Chrysostome,  with  his  characteristic 


EXTENT   OF   INSPIRATION.  25 

acuteness,  distinguished  between  the  inspired  sense  and  the 
material  word.  In  his  work  Contra  Judaeos  II,  XLVIII,  he 
says :  "  When  thou  hearest  Paul  crying  out  and  saying : 
'behold,  I  Paul  say  to  you,  if  you  be  circumcised,  Christ  profits 
you  nothing,'  the  voice,  (fxovr),  only  recognize  to  be  that  of 
Paul,  but  the  sense  and  the  dogma  recognize  to  be  of  Christ  by 
whom  he  was  interiorly  taught."  Salmeron,  Maldonatus, 
Bannes,  Billuart,  Calmet,  and  others  defended  verbal  inspira- 
tion ;  but,  as  to  the  opinion  of  St.  Thomas,  though  it  is  not 
very  clear,  still  some  claim  to  find  in  his  Summa,  2.  2,  Q.  176, 
art.  I,  ad  i.,  a  defense  of  the  doctrine  just  promulgated.  Be 
that  as  it  may,  it  is  certain  that,  in  those  times,  the  question 
was  not  so  well  understood  as  in  later  times,  when  men  have 
studied  these  questions  "ex  professo." 

The  reasonableness  of  the  doctrine  just  enunciated  can  be 
seen  from  a  commonplace  example.  A  professor  delivers  his 
lecture  to  his  auditors,  and  they  may  for  instance,  commit 
the  sense  of  his  discourse  to  writing,  each  in  a  different  manner. 
Provided  they  referred  faithfully  the  sense  of  what  he  said, 
they  might  all  be  said  to  have  his  lecture ;  though  the  words 
differ,  the  sense  remains  the  same,  and  the  sense  is  the  proper 
result  of  inspiration. 

Is  there  then  no  influence  of  the  Holy  Ghost  on  the  words 
of  Holy  Scripture.  Verily  there  is  an  influence.  Though  he 
does  not  directly  inspire  the  words,  still  he  preserves  the 
sacred  writer  from  expressions  which  would  be  inadequate  to 
convey  the  meaning  intended.  God,  then,  "  qui  suaviter  omnia 
disponit ",  assists  the  inspired  writer  to  convey  his  inspired 
thoughts  in  apt  and  adequate  terms,  at  the  same  time  leaving 
him  free  in  his  style  and  diction.  Again,  there  are  times  when 
it  is  necessary  to  admit  the  verbal  inspiration.  This  takes 
place  whenever  it  is  necessary  for  the  sense  of  the  dogma  or  truth 
enunciated.  Such  was  the  case  in  the  revelation  of  the  name 
of  Jahve  to  Moses,  Exod.  Ill,  14.  Similarly,  when  God  im- 
poses a  name  of  mystic  signification,  or  whose  signification 
reveals  some  truth  which  God  wishes  to  make  known,  as  the 
name  of  "  Abraham,"  "  Sara,"  "  Israel."  Also,  when  the  word 
is  essential  to  the  strict  formula  of  the  forma  of  the  Sacra- 
ments, as  the  word  corpus  and  est.  Sanguis,  etc.,  in  the 
Eucharist. 

Corollaries:  i.  Verbal  inspiration  is  neither  required  nor 
given,  when  the  verbal  expression  does  not  determine  the  sense 
intended  to  be  conveyed,  hence  the  inspired  writer  is  free  in 
the  choice  of  words  of  synonymous  import  to  convey  the   in- 


26  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION. 

spired  concept,  and  may  even  use  a  less  fitting  expression,  pro- 
vided it  be  not  incapable  of  conveying  the  truth  intended. 
2.  When  the  inspired  writer  makes  use  of  expressions  accord- 
ing to  the  ordinary  signification  of  the  words,  it  is  not  aflfirmed 
that  the  import  that  these  words  have  in  common  usage  is 
inspired.  Thus,  when  it  is  stated  that  there  is  2,  firmamentum 
above  the  earth,  dividing  the  waters  above  from  those  below, 
it  is  not  intended  to  be  an  inspired  truth  that  the  firmament 
is  a  solid  body,  although  the  first  signification  of  arepew^ia  is  a 
solid  body.  Thus  in  the  celebrated  passage,  Josue  X,  13.,  it  is 
not  intended  by  the  Holy  Ghost  to  assert  that  the  sun  and 
moon  actually  stood  still,  but  to  assert  that  the  day  was 
lengthened,  until  the  Lord  had  taken  vengeance  on  the  Amor- 
ites ;  and  the  writer  simply  uses  an  expression  which  the  people 
could  understand  to  express  such  fact.  If  one  were  to  speak 
in  inspired  language  of  the  close  of  the  day,  in  our  day,  he 
would  say :  the  sun  set ;  the  sun  sank  to  rest ;  because  these 
expressions  are  warranted  by  the  common  language  of  all 
peoples. 

If  the  object  of  the  Holy  Spirit  were  to  teach  the  people 
science,  then  the  wording  of  these  passages  might  be  different, 
but  the  object  was  to  convey  higher  truths,  and  this  object  was 
attained  without  correcting  their  erroneous  scientific  opinions. 
Thus  St.  Luke  in  the  second  chapter  of  his  Gospel,  Vers.  1., 
tells  us  that  an  edict  went  out  from  Caesar  Augustus  that  the 
whole  world  should  be  enrolled.  Now  it  was  only  the  Roman 
world  that  was  really  enrolled,  but  that  was  the  whole  world 
for  the  Jews  at  that  time.  Now  here  dif^culty  often  arises ; 
and,  on  this  line,  the  conflict  between  science  and  religion  is 
fought.  A  thorough  knowledge  of  the  position  of  the  Church, 
and  the  defined  extent  of  inspiration,  and  a  calm,  conservative 
judgment  must  be  brought  to  bear  on  this  conflict,  which  waxes 
so  fiercely.  In  our  special  exegesis  of  the  different  books  of 
Holy  Writ,  we  shall  apply  our  principles  to  the  disputed 
passages. 

Of  the  second  proposition  of  Lessius,  this  only  can  be  said, 
that,  having  confounded  revelation  with  inspiration,  his  expres- 
sion, as  it  stands,  can  not  be  admitted,  but  what  he  meant  is 
probably  what  we  have  already  defended,  that  inspiration  does 
not  necessarily  imply  that  the  Holy  Ghost  then  for  the  first 
time  disclose  these  truths  to  the  writer,  but  is  compatible  with 
the  ordinary  acquisition  of  the  truths  enunciated  ;  which  truths 
the  Holy  Ghost  afterwards  impels  the  writer  to  infallibly  give 
forth  in  writing. 


EXTENT   OF   INSPIRATION.  27 

Of  the  third  proposition,  it  must  be  said,  that,  if  it  is 
asserted  of  any  of  the  existing  books  of  the  Holy  Scripture,  it 
is  false  and  heretical,  and  condemned  in  express  terms  in  the 
definition  of  the  Vatican  Council ;  if  it  only  deals  with  a  possi- 
bility, then  it  is  false  and  absurd  ;  for  a  subsequent  inspiration 
is  a  contradiction  in  terms.  As  Cornely  rightly  says  :  "  repug- 
nat  in  adjecto."  For  to  constitute  inspiration,  we  must  have 
this  supernatural  psychological  action  in  the  mind  of  the  writer, 
and  if  this  be  not  verified,  no  subsequent  action  can  supply  it. 
"  Factum  infectum  fieri  non  potest."  But  one  might  say,  God 
is  free  to  approve  a  book  in  such  way,  and  if  he  were  to  do  so, 
would  not  the  book  be  made  inspired  Scripture  ?  We  answer, 
no.  It  would  be  an  infallibly  true  writing,  rendered  infallible 
by  its  subsequent  approbation,  but  not  inspired  Scripture ;  for 
the  essential  element  required  for  inspiration  never  was  there. 
Wherefore,  that  such  was  the  origin  of  any  of  our  Holy  Books 
is  denied  by  the  Council  of  the  Vatican ;  the  possibility  of  such 
origin  is  disproved  by  a  consideration  of  the  essential  elements 
of  inspiration. 

Bonfrere  the  disciple  of  Lessius  taught  a  doctrine  nearly 
identical  with  that  taught  by  Lessius.  He  defended  a  three- 
fold relation  of  the  Holy  Ghost  to  the  inspired  writings; 
antecedent,  concomitant,  and  consequent.  According  to  Bon- 
frere, the  antecedent  relation  had  actuated  the  Prophets,  who 
committed  to  writing  the  things  revealed,  without  any  part  in 
their  conception  except  a  passive  action,  simply  as  an  aman- 
uensis writes  down  the  dictated  ideas,  always,  of  course,  in 
their  own  terms,  as  we  have  just  seen.  This  coincides  with  the 
Catholic  idea  of  revelation  just  now  treated. 

The  concomitant  relation  directed  the  writer  as  one  would 
direct  another  in  writing  a  human  document,  not  permitting 
him  to  fall  into  error.  Bonfrere  even  admitted  in  this  mode  a 
vague  general  impulse  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  write  such  a 
history.  He  also  admitted  a  sort  of  prompting  influence,  in 
case  the  writer's  memory  failed  him,  according  to  that  passage 
in  St.  Matthew  :  "  He  (the  Holy  Ghost)  will  suggest  all  things 
to  you, whatever  I  shall  have  said  to  you."  This  mode  Bon- 
frere asserted  had  taken  place  with  all  the  books,  except  the 
prophetical  works  and  the  Pentateuch.  The  subsequent  rela- 
tion coincides  with  the  third  opinion  of  Lessius,  except  that 
Bonfrere  expressly  denied  that  such  had  been  the  origin  of  any 
of  the  books  now  possessed  by  the  Church,  but  asserted  the 
non-repugnance  of  such  action,  and  the  possibility  that  such 
might  have  been  the  origin  of  some  of  the  inspired  works  which 


28  EXTENT   OF   INSPIRATION. 

the  Church  has  lost.  This  opinion  falls  under  the  same  censure 
as  that  of  Lessius.  The  Church  simply  infallibly  declares  a 
book  to  be  inspired  which  the  Holy  Ghost,  as  principal  author, 
has  produced ;  but  it  does  not,  by  its  definition  make  inspired 
that  which  antecedently  had  been  by  only  human  industry. 
We  have  only  to  deal  therefore  with  the  second  opinion,  which 
constitutes  inspiration  to  be  something  negative,  a  protecting 
influence,  that  protects  the  writer  from  error,  and  we  assert 
that  such  action  is  not  sufficient  to  constitute  God  the  author 
of  the  book. 

Inspiration  is  an  active,  positive  influence  in  every  part  of 
the  Holy  Scripture.  No  other  relation  can  constitute  God  the 
author  of  the  Holy  Writ.  If,  indeed,  we  were  to  defend  that 
God  only  preserved  from  error,  as  Calmet  asserted,  it  would 
follow,  that  if  the  writer  were  exempt  from  error  of  himself, 
unaided  by  any  other  cause,  God  would  not  be  the  author  of 
the  book  so  written  ;  and,  as  this  would  doubtless  have  hap- 
pened in  many  passages  and  whole  chapters,  there  would  thus 
be  parts  of  which  God  could  not  be  said  to  be  the  author,  as 
He  would  have  had  no  part  except  a  general  supervision  in 
their  production.  This  the  definition  of  the  Vatican  Council 
forbids  to  assert.  Moreover,  if  the  Holy  Ghost  did  not  move 
positively  and  impel  to  write  what  God  wished  to  give  forth  to 
man,  many  useless  details  would  be  intermingled  in  the  Scrip- 
tures, and  no  means  would  be  forthcoming  to  warrant  that  the 
truths  which  God  wished  to  communicate  to  us  were  all  deliv- 
ered to  us.  For  the  preservation  from  error  would  never  bring 
about  that  "  ea  (?;««/^  et  sola  quae  Deus  communicare  vult " 
would  be  transmitted  to  us.  The  dispensation  of  God  would 
depend  on  the  fallible  judgment  of  man,  which  is  inadmissible. 
Again,  there  would  be  no  difference,  in  such  case,  between  the 
definitions  of  oecumenical  councils  and  of  the  Pope's  "  ex  cath- 
edra," and  the  Holy  Scriptures;  for,  in  these  definitions,  there 
is  the  negative  assistance  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  But  we  know 
that  the  dignity  and  rank  of  such  documents  are  far  below  that 
of  the  Holy  Writ ;  for  these  are  human  documents,  infallible  in 
their  truth,  but  they  can  not  be  said  to  have  God  iox  \.\i€\x  author . 

Jahn  departed  farther  from  the  truth  than  Benfrere  had 
gone,  asserting  inspiration  to  be,  in  general,  only  a  negative 
assistance  protecting  from  error;  and  he  defended  that  such 
was  the  general  origin  of  our  books.  Logical  in  his  opinion, 
and  recognizing  that  inspiration  imported  something  positive, 
he  boldly  proclaimed  that  inspiration  was  a  misapplied  term  ; 
but,  as  it  was  consecrated  by  usage,  was  difficult  to  change. 


EXTENT    OF    INSPIRATION.  29 

Here  therefore,  as  in  other  things,  "  in  medio  stat  virtus." 
The  Fathers  and  the  older  theologians  exaggerated  inspiration, 
extending  it  to  the  utmost  minutiae ;  the  later  protestants, 
rationalists,  and  some  Catholic  writers  have  derogated  in  such 
manner  from  inspiration,  as  to  reduce  it  almost  to  a  mere  gen- 
eral supervision  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  which  might  take  place 
with  any  pious  writer.  The  Fathers  sometimes  compared  the 
inspired  writer  to  a  musical  instrument  played  on  by  the  Holy 
Spirit.  (St.  Justin,  Cohort,  ad  Graecos,  VHI ;  St.  Athanasius, 
Legat.  pro  Christo,  IX.)  These  comparisons  admit  of  a  benign 
interpretation,  as  they  were  written  in  the  ages  of  the  simplic- 
ity of  faith,  before  the  terrible  conflict  with  error  and  heresy 
had  necessitated  the  use  of  precise  concepts.  This  general 
remark  applies  to  the  writings  of  the  Fathers  in  every  depart- 
ment of  knowledge. 

The  second  agent  is  an  instrument  but  not  an  inanimate 
one.  He  is  a  sentient  rational  instrument,  making  use,  in  the 
very  act  of  inspiration,  of  all  his  faculties.  In  our  treatise  on 
inspiration,  we  must  not  disguise  the  fact,  that  many  deny  that 
we  are  held  by  the  definition  of  the  Councils  of  Trent  and 
Vatican  to  extend  the  decree  to  all  the  res  et  sententice ;  and 
even  some  Catholics  hold  that  we  are  bound  to  believe  "  fide 
divina"  only  that  the  dogmatic  and  moral  parts  and  those 
others  which  directly  refer  to  these  are  inspired.  They  allege 
as  ground  for  their  assertion,  that  the  Vatican  Council  did  not 
add  anything  to  the  definition  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  in  rela- 
tion to  the  extent  of  inspiration,  and  the  Council  of  Trent  did 
not  define  what  it  meant  by  a  part.  It  would  seem  at  times, 
that  there  was  no  medium  in  human  language  to  so  define  a 
concept  as  to  preclude  different  opinions  regarding  it. 

Holden,  the  English  professor  at  the  Sorbonne  (f  1662).  was 
the  first  among  Catholics  to  distinguish  between  the  doctrinal 
parts  of  Scripture,  which,  he  asserted,  were  to  be  believed  fide 
divina,  and  the  historical  and  other  parts,  which  he  held  to  be 
written  without  any  special  influence  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Thus 
in  his  Analysis  of  Faith,  V.:  "  The  special  divine  assistance 
given  to  the  author  of  whatever  book  the  church  receives  as 
the  Word  of  God,  extends  only  to  those  things  which  are 
doctrinal,  or  have  a  proximate  or  necessary  bearing  on  doctrine  ; 
but,  in  these  things  which  are  not  of  the  primary  intent  of  the 
writer,  or  are  relating  to  other  things,  we  believe  him  to  have 
received  from  God  only  that  assistance  which  is  common  to 
other  pious  writers"  ;  and  II,  3  :  "Although  it  is  not  licit  to 
impeach  as  false  aught  contained  in  the  Holy  Code,  neverthe- 


30  EXTENT   OF   INSPIRATION. 

less,  the  things  which  do  not  relate  to  religion  do  not  constitute 
articles  of  Catholic  faith."  His  doctrine  was  examined  by  the 
Sorbonne  and  condemned ;  but,  still,  this  condemnation  does 
not  end  the  controversy,  for  this  condemnation  was  of  several 
theologians,  but  not  of  the  Church.  Chrismann  asserts  nearly 
the  same  doctrine.  Newman,  in  the  19th  Century  for  1884, 
excludes  from  t\iQ  fide  divina  credenda  "  obiter  dicta  "  ;  such  as, 
for  instance,  that  Nabuchodonosor  was  king  of  Niniveh,  Judith 
I,  7 ;  or  that  Paul  left  his  cloak  at  Troas,  or  that  Tobias'  dog 
wagged  his  tail.  Tob.  XI,  9  :  "  And  here  I  am  led  on  to  in- 
quire whether  obiter  dicta  are  conceivable  in  an  inspired  docu- 
ment. We  know  that  they  are  held  to  exist  and  even  required 
in  treating  of  the  dogmatic  utterances  of  Popes,  but  are  they 
compatible  with  inspiration  ?  The  common  opinion  is  that 
they  are  not.  Professor  Lamy  thus  writes  about  them,  in  the 
form  of  an  objection :  '  Many  minute  matters  occur  in  the 
sacred  writers  which  have  regard  only  to  human  feebleness  and 
the  natural  necessities  of  life,  and  by  no  means  require  inspira- 
tion, since  they  can  otherwise  be  perfectly  well  known,  and 
seem  scarcely  worthy  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  for  instance  what 
is  said  of  the  dog  of  Tobias,  St.  Paul's  penula,  and  the  saluta- 
tions at  the  end  of  the  Epistles.'  Neither  he  nor  Fr.  Patrizi 
allow  of  these  exceptions ;  but  Fr.  Patrizi,  as  Lamy  quotes  him, 
'  damnare  non  audet  eos  qui  haec  tenerent,'  viz.,  exceptions, 
and  he  himself,  by  keeping  silence,  seems  unable  to  condemn 
them  either. 

By  obiter  dicta  in  Scripture  I  also  mean  such  statements  as 
we  find  in  the  Book  of  Judith,  that  Nabuchodonosor  was  king 
of  Nineveh.  Now  it  is  in  favour  of  there  being  such  unauthori- 
tative obiter  dicta,  that  unlike  those  which  occur  in  dogmatic 
utterances  of  Popes  and  Councils,  they  are,  in  Scripture,  not 
doctrinal,  but  mere  unimportant  statements  of  fact ;  whereas 
those  of  Popes  and  Councils  may  relate  to  faith  and  morals, 
and  are  said  to  be  uttered  obiter,  because  they  are  not  con- 
tained within  the  scope  of  the  formal  definition,  and  imply  no 
intention  of  binding  the  consciences  of  the  faithful.  There 
does  not  then  seem  any  serious  difficulty  in  admitting  their 
existence  in  Scripture.  Let  it  be  observed,  its  miracles  are 
doctrinal  facts,  and  in  no  sense  of  the  phrase  can  be  considered 
obiter  dicta. 

It  may  be  questioned,  too,  whether  the  absence  of  chro- 
nological sequence  might  not  be  represented  as  an  infringement 
of  plenary  inspiration,  more  serious  than  the  obiter  dicta  of 
of  which  I  have  been  speaking.     Yet  St.  Matthew  is  admitted 


EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION.  31 

by  approved  commentators  to  be  unsoHcitous  as  to  order  of 
time.  So  says  Fr.  Patrizi  {De  Evang.  lib,  ii.  p.  i),  viz.,  '  Mat- 
thaeum  de  observando  temporis  ordine  minime  soUicitum  esse'. 
He  gives  instances,  and  then  repeats  '  Matthew  did  not  observe 
order  of  time.'  If  such  absence  of  order  is  compatible  with 
inspiration  in  St.  Matthew,  as  it  is,  it  might  be  consistent  with 
inspiration  in  parts  of  the  Old  Testament,  supposing  they  are 
open  to  re-arrangement  in  chronology.  Does  not  this  teach 
us  to  fall  back  upon  the  decision  of  the  Councils  that  '  faith 
and  morals  pertaining  to  the  edification  of  Christian  doctrine ' 
are  the  scope,  the  true  scope,  of  inspiration  ?  And  is  not  the 
Holy  See  the  judge  given  us  for  determining  what  is  for  edifi- 
cation and  what  is  not  ?" 

Lenormant,  Les  Origines  de  Thistoire  d'apres  la  Bible  et  les 
traditions  des  peuples  orient.,  Paris,  1880,  pref.,  pag.  VI,  denies 
that  any  of  the  historic  parts  of  the  Bible  are  inspired,  and  be- 
lieves that  Genesis  is  is  largely  made  up  of  myths.  Rohling 
in  „jDtc  3n[^iratton  ber^ibel",  Munster,  1872,  rejects  inspiration 
in  these  things  which  pertain  to  science  and  natural  history. 
This  work  has  been  ably  refuted  by  Franzelin  in  his  work  De 
Tradit.  et  Sac.  Script. 

Now  it  is  not,  I  believe,  in  the  province  of  any  private  in- 
dividual to  term  these  opinions  heretical,  but  we  hold  them,  if 
we  except  that  of  Card.  Newman  alone,  to  be  theologically 
false.  Newman's  opinion  we  do  not  embrace,  but  still  it  were 
too  much  to  term  it  false.  The  protestants  began  by  asserting 
inspiration  for  the  Masoretic  points,  with  which  the  Hebrew 
text  was  adorned  in  the  ninth  century,  A.  D.;  they  now  limit 
inspiration  to  a  few  truths  of  dogma  or  morals,  and  daily  drift 
farther  and  farther  from  the  old  faith  regarding  the  Scriptures, 
and  embrace  more  and  more  the  tenets  of  rationalistic  criticism. 

The  opinions  above  quoted  have  for  their  chief  basis,  that 
the  scope  of  the  Holy  Books  is  to  teach  us  faith  and  morals, 
and  as  the  Holy  Ghost  protects  the  Pope  only  in  the  affairs  of 
faith  and  morals,  so  they  say.  He  protected  inspired  writers 
only  in  that  which  was  necessary ;  secondly,  they  assert  that  it 
were  unworthy  of  the  Holy  Ghost  to  inspire  these  minute 
details.  We  answer  briefly,  that  the  influence  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  is  far  more  potent  in  the  inspired  writer  than  in  the 
Pope,  as  we  have  already  explained:  for  God  is  not  the  Author 
of  pontifical  definitions  "  ex  cathedra."  But  God  is  the  author 
of  all  the  parts  of  the  Scripture  ;  therefore,  an  error  in  the  work 
[I  speak  of  the  res  et  Sententiae,  not  of  a  defective  word  made 
use  of  by  the  writer]  would  be  imputable  to  God,  an  hypo- 


32  EXTENT   OF   INSPIRATION. 

thesis  which  we  can  not  admit.  The  Vatican  Council  has  de- 
fined that  the  Scriptures  contain  the  inspired  truth,  without 
admixture  of  error.  This  could  not  be  said,  if  historic,  chron- 
ological geographical,  or  scientific  error  were  there  found. 
Moreover,  grant  that  such  error  may  be  found  in  the  Holy- 
Scripture,  and  the  bases  of  Scripture  are  shattered,  for  it  will 
then  be  uncertain,  what  is  inspired,  and  what  is  not;  and,  "in 
aestu  passionum,"  men  will  interpret  the  Holy  Writ  always 
favorably  to  their  own  preconceived  ideas ;  and,  thus,  the  certi- 
tude of  the  Scriptures  is  destroyed.  Again,  such  opinion  is 
contrary  to  the  unanimous  voice  of  tradition.  "  I  believe," 
says  St.  Augustine,  "  that  no  Sacred  writer  has  been  deceived 
in  anything."  (Plpist.  72  ad  Hieron.)  S.  J.  Chryst.,  Hom. 
XV,  in  Gen.,  says  that  every  word  is  to  be  pondered,  as  they 
are  the  words  of  the  Holy  Ghost  {i,  e.  the  sense  of  the  words.) 
So,  St.  Jerome  reproaches,  for  the  same  reason,  those  who  do 
not  receive  the  Epistle  to  Philemon.  St.  Thomas,  Summa 
Theol.  I.  Q.  I,  art.  10,  ad.  3.:  "  It  is  evident  that  there  never 
can  be  falsehood  contained  in  the  literal  sense",  and  Q.  32,  art. 
4:  ''A  thing  pertains  to  faith  in  two  ways.  In  one  way, 
directly,  as  those  things  which  are  principally  consigned  to  us ; 
as  for  instance,  that  God  is  triune.  Things  pertain  indirectly 
to  faith,  from  whose  contrary  would  follow  something  perni- 
cious to  faith;  as,  for  instance,  if  one  were  to  say  that  Samuel 
were  not  the  son  of  Helcana ;  for  from  this  it  would  follow  that 
the  Scriptures  were  false." 

When  Erasmus,  in  the  XVI.  century,  hinted  that  the  Evan- 
gelists, in  quoting  from  the  Old  Testament,  had  relied  on  their 
memory,  and  had  been  faulty  in  some  respects,  he  was  so  hotly 
attacked  by  the  theologians  that  he  abandoned  his  position 
and  apologized.  St.  Liguori  in  his  Tract  Contra  Hereticos, 
IV,  5 — 28,  in  speaking  of  the  opinion  of  those  who  separated 
truth  from  truth  in  the  Holy  Scriptures,  maintaining  that  some 
things  were  from  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  others  from  the  human 
mind,  calls  their  opinion  false  and  impious.  We  have  seen 
what  the  result  has  been  of  private  interpretation  in  the  protes- 
tant  church  !  A  similar  result  would  be  verified  in  the  Catholic 
Church,  should  we  make  such  distinction  as  regards  Holy 
Scripture,  for  all  would  be  free  to  say  that  this  or  that  passage 
did  not  pertain  to  Holy  Scripture.  Finally,  if  inspiration  did 
not  extend  beyond  the  questions  of  faith  and  morals,  or  what 
is  related  thereto,  a  great  part  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  would 
not  be  inspired ;  for  the  books,  for  instance,  of  Josue,  Judges 


EXTENT   OF   INSPIRATION.  33 

and  a  great  part  of  the  Pentateuch  pertain  in  no  wise  to  faith 
or  morals,  but  are  a  history  of  events  of  the  people  of  God. 

The  question  of  the  inspiration  of  Obiter  Dicta  is  a  cele- 
brated one  in  Biblical  Criticism.  Obiter  Dicta  may  be  called 
those  details  of  minor  moment  related  in  Holy  Writ,  which  are 
inserted  "  en  passant",  not  seemingly  comprised  in  the  main 
scope  and  intention  of  the  writer.  The  passage  in  Tobias  XI, 
9.  relating  to  the  wagging  of  the  tail  of  Tobias'  dog :  "  Blandi- 
mento  suae  caudae  gaudebat",  and  the  passage  in  St.  Paul's 
letter  to  Timothy,  II  Tim.  IV,  13.  relating  to  the  cloak  left  at 
Troas :  "  Penulam,  quam  reliqui  Troade  apud  Carpum,  veniens 
afTer  tecum",  are  ordinarily  quoted  as  examples  of  Obiter 
Dicta.  Concerning  these,  two  questions  may  be  raised:  i. 
Are  the  Obiter  Dicta  inspired  ?  2.  Is  it  of  faith  that  these  are 
inspired  ?  Catholic  theologians  generally  answer  the  first  ques- 
tion in  the  affirmative.  And,  in  truth,  such  must  be  defended, 
for  the  same  danger  would  menace  us  as  before  mentioned, 
were  we  to  reject  the  inspiration  of  these  passages,  namely, 
that  of  gradually  widening  the  circle  of  these,  and  inducing  un- 
certainty into  the  Scripture,  by  the  freedom  with  which  men 
might  reject  these  details. 

Card.  Newman  asserted  that,  in  his  opinion  these  were  not 
of  faith.  Patrizi,  quoted  by  Lamy,  and  by  him  followed,  does 
not  dare  condemn  the  opinion  of  those  who  deny  that  the 
Obiter  Dicta  are  of  faith.  Schmidt,  a  recent  writer  quoted  by 
Vigouroux,  says:  "Credimus  doctrinam  quam  proposuimus 
quoad  illam  specialem  assertionem  quae  immunitatem  ab  errore, 
divinam  auctoritatem,  et  inspirationem  ipsam  ad  res  indiffe. 
rentes  etiam  ■minimas  extendit  non  esse  de  fide,  et  contrariam  non 
esse  haeresim.  Nihilominus,  persuasum  nobis  est  doctrinam 
nostram  omnino  certam  esse,  nee  contrariam  ullo  vtodo  proba- 
bilem  aut  tolerabilent  judicamus^  This  is  a  succinct  statement 
of  the  Catholic  position ;  hence,  we  are  introduced  to  the 
answer  to  the  fi  r  s  t  question  :  are  those  details  inspired  ? 
This  we  answer  in  the  affirmative. 

The  theologians,  Newman  excepted,  quoted  above,  gener- 
ally, while  denying  that  there  was  any  dogma  to  force  us  to 
admit  the  inspiration  of  these  details,  defend,  at  the  same  time 
that  they  are  inspired,  and  that  an  error  in  these  can  not  be 
admitted  in  the  Sacred  Scriptures,  as  they  came  forth  from  the 
inspired  writers'  pen.  Schmidt  openly  and  explicitly  teaches 
such  to  be  the  case.  And,  indeed,  there  is  danger  in  the  oppo- 
site views.  Newman  in  the  19th  Cent,  for  1884  seems  to  mini- 
mize this  danger,  and  claims  that  similar  danger  would  come 

c 


34  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION. 

from  the  admission  of  accidental  variations  in  the  text,  through 
the  ravages  of  time,  which  all  admit ;  but  such  is  not  the  case, 
for  in  relation  to  the  obiter  dictum,  we  are  directly  attacking 
the  influence  which  the  Holy  Ghost  had  on  the  books ;  while,  in 
the  other  case,  we  are  only  bringing  to  bear  on  documents,  the 
light  of  critics,  to  determine  whether  or  not  the  document  has 
been  preserved  through  the  vicissitudes  of  time.  St.  Jerome, 
whom  no  one  will  accuse  of  excessive  conservatism,  held  ex- 
pressly that  these  details  were  inspired,  and  cited  the  instance 
of  Paul's  cloak.  (Prol.  in  Phil.  Tom.  XXVI,  col.  600.)  The 
Fathers  are  unanimous  in  proclaiming  for  the  Scriptures 
exemption  from  all  error.  The  objection  is  made  that  these 
details  are  too  minute  for  an  inspiration,  which,  as  we  have 
stated,  is  a  special  influence  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  mind  of 
the  inspired  writer ;  and  that  it  would  be  unworthy  of  God  to 
inspire  such  minutiae ;  but  we  must  remember  that  "  Deus 
creavit  Angelos  in  coelis  ;  vermiculos  in  terris,  nee  major  fuit  in 
illis,  nee  minor  in  istis."  (St.  Augustine,  quoted  by  St.  Jerome, 
ibid.)  These  details  have  their  utility  also.  For  instance,  the 
description  in  Tobias  is  a  vivid  pen  picture  of  the  return  of  one 
to  his  home,  after  a  protracted  absence.  St.  Paul  shows  his 
simple  and  tender  confidence  in  Timothy  by  bidding  him  bring 
his  cloak  from  Troas.  But  what  we  assert  for  the  obiter  dicta 
as  they  came  from  the  hand  of  the  inspired  writer,  we  do  not, 
in  any  wise,  assert  for  them,  as  they  exist  to-day.  As  the  ob- 
ject of  the  Holy  Scripture  could  be  obtained  without  a  stupen- 
dous miracle,  wrought  on  the  part  of  God,  to  preserve  these 
from  error,  we  admit  that  in  these,  owing  to  the  various  vicissi- 
tudes through  which  our  Holy  Books  have  passed,  accidental 
errors  may  have  occurred.  In  another  treatise,  we  shall  defend 
that  the  text  of  the  Holy  Scripture,  as  we  have  it  to-day  is  sub- 
stantially correct,  but  admits  of  accidental  errors.  Here  we 
might  quote  the  golden  words  of  St.  Augustine :  "  If,  in  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  we  find  aught  that  seems  incredible,  it  is  not 
to  be  said  that  the  author  of  this  book  has  not  known  the 
truth  ;  but  we  should  say:  the  manuscript  is  defective,  or  the 
transcriber  erred,  or  we  do  not  understands  Many  of  these 
errors  are  the  result  of  the  ignorance  or  inexactness  of  the 
transcribers  ;  as,  for  instance,  St.  Jerome  translates  the  No- 
Amon,  Nahum  III,  8.  to  be  Alexandria,  whereas  Alexandria 
was  not  built  by  Alexander  M.  till  three  centuries  later,  and 
then  was  not  the  site  of  No-Amon,  which  was  the  city  of 
Thebes,the  capital  of  Upper  Egypt.  (Bible  et  Decouverts 
Modernes,  Volume,  IV.  259 — 262.)     Also  St.  Jerome  confesses 


EXTENT   OF   INSPIRATION.  35 

that  he  rendered  the  Jl'^p^'p' o^  Jonas,  by  "hedera",  ivy,  as 

he  thought  his  readers  unacquainted  with  the  plant  which  is 
really  signified,  the  ricinus,  or  Castor  plant. 

Moreover,  as  has  already  been  stated,  the  Sacred  writers 
make  use  of  the  common  parlance  of  the  people  :  "  secundum 
opinionem  populi  loquitur  Scriptura."  (S.  Th.  i.  2.  198.)  A 
question  of  vital  importance,  in  our  days,  is  the  relation  of 
Scripture  to  Science.  Men's  minds  have  been  active  ever  since 
the  writing  of  Scripture  itself,  and  have  found  many  things  un- 
known at  the  time  of  the  writing  of  the  Holy  Books.  They  have 
delved  down  deep  into  the  mysterious  storehouse  of  nature, 
have  discovered  her  treasures,  have  imprisoned  her  mighty 
forces  to  do  their  will,  and  serve  them  in  the  affairs  of  their 
civil  and  domestic  life.  •  They  have  penetrated  the  heavens,  and 
investigated  the  secrets  of  the  vast  expanse  which  men  call  the 
firmament.  Many  truths, and  many  more  or  less  reasonable  hypo- 
theses have  been  thus  found  out.  But  science,  proud  of  her 
achievements,  and  restless  under  restraint,  too  oft  turns  her 
powers  against  the  God-given  truths  of  the  Sacred  Text,  and 
here  the  warfare  waxes  bitter  indeed,  and  many  there  are  who 
incline  too  much  to  the  side  of  science,  even  of  those  of  the 
household  of  faith.  The  question,  then,  is  asked :  does  inspira- 
tion extend  to  the  scientific  details  of  the  Bible  ?  God  has  not 
directly  revealed  the  scientific  truths  of  the  Bible.  This  all 
admit,  but,  nevertheless,  he  could  have  indirectly  revealed 
these,  as  they  form  a  component  factor  in  a  narrative,  the  ob- 
ject of  which  is  to  teach  men  their  relations  to  the  Author  of 
their  being.  The  majority  of  Catholic  interpreters  hold  that 
the  scientific  truths  in  Genesis  are  indirectly  revealed.  How- 
ever, all  scientific  truths  are  inspired,  in  the  sense  that  God 
impelled  the  Sacred  writer  to  write  those  truths  with  infallible 
veracity  and  certainty.  Hence,  we  join  our  voices  with  the 
voice  of  all  the  learned  in  asserting  that  the  scope  of  the  Holy 
Books  was  not  to  teach  men  science,  while  we  demand  immun- 
ity from  error  for  those  scientific  assertions  in  this  sense,  that 
the  truth  intended  to  be  conveyed  by  every  sentence  and  pro- 
position in  the  Bible,  as  it  came  from  the  pen  of  the  writer,  is 
inspired.  Galileo,  in  a  letter  to  the  Grand  Duchess  of  Milan, 
quoted  a  celebrated  saying  of  Baronius  :  "  Spiritui  Sancto  men- 
tem  fuisse  nos  docere  quomodo  ad  ccelum  eatur,  non  quomodo 
coelum  gradiatur."  Since  the  time  of  Galileo,  men  have  con- 
ceded that  the  Scripture  spoke  according  to  the  common  opin- 
ions of  the  people,  and  attributed  significations  to  words, 
which  the  vulgar  speech  of  the  day  warranted.    For  God  made 


36  EXTENT  OF  INSPIRATION. 

use  of  a  human  medium  to  convey  his  message  to  man,  and  he 
did  not  startle  the  people  by  strange  expressions,  which  would 
have  been  unintelligible  to  all  people  at  that  stage  of  human 
development.  Men  speak  thus  to-day,  and  are  not  accused  of 
inexactness  or  with  combating  science.  Hence,  with  this  in 
mind,  we  can  reconcile  the  assertions  of  true  science  with  the 
inspired  Word  of  God,  for  there  can  be  no  combat  between 
truth  and  truth ;  for  the  Author  of  both  human  and  divine 
science  is  the  "  Essential  and  Infinite  Truth."  For  although 
faith  is  above  reason,  no  real  discussion,  no  real  conflict  can  be 
found  between  them  since  both  arise  from  one  and  the  same 
fount  of  immutable  and  eternal  truth,  the  great  and  good  God. 
(Pius  IX.,  Encyc.  of  Nov.  9,  1846.)  Some  hypotheses  broached 
by  the  incredulous  and  shallow  dabbler  in  science  may  conflict 
with  the  truths  of  Scripture,  but  this  imports  nothing.  The 
Church  blesses  scientific  research,  and  fears  nothing  therefrom. 
She  invites  investigation  into  every  field  of  human  thought, 
and  only  good  to  herself  can  come  therefrom.  The  greatest 
astronomer  of  this  century.  Father  Secchi,  S.  J.,  was  one  of  her 
faithful  children.  The  Vatican  Council  approved  of  scientific 
research  explicitly,  even  when  all  the  resources  of  science  were 
brought  to  bear  to  oppose  the  Church.  It  leaves  science  free 
to  use  its  own  methods.  "  Neither  does  the  Church  forbid  that 
these  sciences  should,  in  their  own  domain,  use  their  own  prin- 
ciples and  method."     (Cone.  Vat.  De  Fide,  IV.) 

Hence  we  should  guard  against  attributing  to  a  passage  of 
Scripture  a  signification,  which  in  se  it  has  not,  but  which  may 
have  been  given  to  it  by  some  interpreter.  When  we  find  by 
incontestable  evidence  that  science  has  demonstrated  a  truth, 
which  is  in  seeming  opposition  to  what  has  by  some  been  held 
to  be  the  opinion  gleaned  from  the  Holy  Scriptures,  we  should 
seek  some  other  interpretation,  which  the  text  must  bear,  as 
truth  and  truth  can  not  conflict,  and  we  can  thus  reconcile 
these  two  truths  coming  from  different  sources.  In  this  man- 
ner, we  may  reconcile  Gen.  I.  14:     "  And  God  said  let  there  be 

luminaries  in  the  firmament  of  heaven And  God  made 

two  great  luminaries,  a  greater  luminary  to  rule  the  day  and  a 
lesser  luminary  to  rule  the  night,  and  the  stars."  Now  it  would 
seem  from  this  that  the  stars  were  less  in  magnitude  than  the 
moon.  As  science  has  indisputably  proven  the  contrary,  what 
must  we  admit?  That  the  inspired  writer  spoke  according  to 
the  appearance  of  things,  and  for  us  the  moon  is  a  greater  lum- 
inary than  the  stars.  Hence,  even  the  Sun  is  not  necessarily 
asserted  to  be  a  greater  luminary  in  fact  than  the  stars,  but 
only  in  appearance. 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT.  37 

In  relation  to  the  inspiration  of  "dicta  aliorum",  no  definite 
rule  can  be  given.  The  character  of  the  person,  the  circum- 
stances in  which  such  saying  is  uttered,  the  mode  of  quoting, 
and  the  nature  of  the  proposition  must  be  weighed.  For  in- 
stance, the  sayings  which  the  inspired  writers  make  their  own 
by  their  approbation  are  inspired.  St.  Peter  was  inspired, 
when  he  confessed  the  divinity  of  Christ,  not  when  he  denied 
Christ.  The  words  of  impious  men  sometimes  are  quoted,  but 
"in  persona  illorum,"  not  intending  them  to  be  as  truths.  In 
regard  to  these,  although  no  prior  rule  can  be  laid  down,  still 
there  is  no  difficulty  in  distinguishing  the  true  from  the  false. 

Chapter  IV. 
The  Canon. 

Canon,  from  Greek  kuvcov,  originally  meant  any  straight 
rod  or  bar.  From  this  basal  signification  were  formed  the  cog- 
nate meanings  of  the  amussis  or  carpenter's  rule,  the  beam  or 
tongue  of  the  balance,  and  then,  like  norma,  any  rule  or  stand- 
ard, whether  in  the  physical  or  moral  order.  Hence,  it  came 
to  be  generally  applied  as  a  rule  or  measure  of  anything.  It  is 
much  controverted  and  quite  uncertain,  just  what  particular 
shade  of  the  general  meaning  the  old  writers  had  in  mind,  when 
they  first  applied  this  word  to  the  official  list  of  the  Holy 
Books.  Such  question  is,  in  fact,  of  no  real  value  to  any  man, 
and  yet  writers  quibble  and  haggle  about  it,  as  though  upon  it 
depended  some  great  question.  Some  contend  that,  in  pre- 
dicting the  term  of  the  Holy  Books,  the  early  writers  passed 
from  the  active  signification  of  the  term  to  its  effect,  and  used 
the  measure  for  the  thing  measured  ;  thus  the  canon  would  be 
the  list  officially  ruled  and  measured  by  the  Church.  Others 
hold  that  the  said  writers  had  in  mind  that  the  Holy  Books 
formed  a  rule  of  faith  and  morals.  I  can  not  entertain  as 
probable  this  second  opinion  ;  it  seems  far-fetched,  and  not  well 
founded  in  what  the  early  writers  have  written.  I  am  of  the 
persuasion  that  the  term  was  applied  to  the  collection  of  Scrip- 
tures to  signify  that  such  list  formed  the  criterion  and  measure 
of  a  book's  divine  origin.  The  list  was  thus  a  rule ;  for  only  the 
books  which  satisfied  its  requirements,  by  being  incorporated 
in  it,  were  of  divine  authority.  At  all  events,  the  signification 
of  an  official  list  of  things  or  persons  dates  back  to  a  great 
antiquity.  Thus,  in  the  Councils  of  Nice  and  Antioch,  the 
catalogue  of  the  sacred   persons  attached  to  any  particular 


38        THE  CANON  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

Church  was  called  the  canon.  Thus,  to-day,  those  who  consti- 
tute the  chapter  are  called  Canons.  The  appositeness  of  the 
term,  all  must  concede,  for  such  sanctioned  catalogue  forms  a 
measure  of  inspiration,  and  we  receive  only  as  inspired  that 
which  conforms  to  its  measurement. 

The  canon  of  Holy  Scripture  then  is  the  official  catalogue  of 
the  Books  that  the  Church  authoritatively  promulgates  as  the 
product  of  the  Authorship  of  God. 

This  official  list  is  found  in  the  Council  of  Trent,  Sess. 
4,  De  Can.  Script.:  "  The  synod  has  thought  good  to  subjoin 
to  the  decree  an  index  of  the  Holy  Books,  lest  to  any  man 
there  should  arise  a  doubt  as  to  which  are  the  books  that  are 
received  by  the  said  Synod.  These  are  the  following :  Of  the 
Old  Testament,  the  five  books  of  Moses,  to  wit :  Genesis,  Ex- 
odus, Leviticus,  Numbers,  Deuteronomy,  Josue,  Judges,  Ruth, 
the  four  Books  of  Kings,  the  two  Books  of  Paralipomenon,  the 
First  Book  of  Esdras  and  the  Second,  which  is  called  that  of 
Nehemias,  Tobias,  Judith,  Esther,  Job,  the  Davidic  Psalter  of 
150  Psalms,  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  The  Canticle  of  Canticles, 
Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  Isaias,  Jeremias  with  Baruch,  Ezechiel, 
Daniel,  The  Twelve  Minor  Prophets,  to  wit:  Hosea,  Joel, 
Amos,  Abdias,  Jonas,  Michaeas,  Nahum,  Habukuk,  Sophonias, 
Haggaeus,  Zachary,  Malachy,  and  The  First  and  Second  of 
Maccabees.  Of  the  New  Testament:  The  Four  Gospels, 
according  to  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke  and  John,  the  Acts  of  The 
Apostles,  the  fourteen  Epistles  of  the  Apostle  St.  Paul,  to  wit : 
The  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  the  two  Epistles  to  the  Corinthi- 
ans, the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians, 
the  Epistle  to  the  Philippians,  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians, 
the  two  Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians,  the  two  Epistles  to 
Timothy,  the  Epistle  to  Titus,  the  Epistle  to  Philemon,  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews ;  the  two  Epistles  of  St.  Peter,  the 
three  Epistles  of  the  Apostle  John,  one  Epistle  of  the  Apostle 
James,  one  Epistle  of  the  Apostle  Jude,  and  the  Apocalypse  of 
the  Apostle  John."  In  this  catalogue,  there  are  recorded  forty- 
five  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  twenty-seven  of  the  New. 

As  the  Holy  Books  are  divided  into  two  great  classes,  the 
Old  and  New  Testament,  so  we  must  treat  separately  of  the 
canons  of  these  two  Testaments. 

Chapter  V. 

The  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament. 

The  books  containing  God's  covenant  to  man  are  desig- 
nated by  three  equivalent  terms  in  the  three  great  Scriptural 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT.         39 

tongues.     In   Hebrew   it    is    H*''!!?*    i"   Greek,    ^LadrjK-q^  and 

in  Latin,  Testamentum.  Although  the  etymological  construc- 
tion of  these  terms  is  not  exactly  identical,  still,  in  fact,  their 
accepted  sense  in  this  predication  is  the  same,  that  of  a  pact, 
treaty  or  covenant ;  and  they  designate  the  written  instruments 
of  God's  solemn  covenant  with  mankind. 

A  fundamental  variation  took  place  in  God's  dealings  with 
his  creature  in  the  mission  of  the  Messiah,  and,  as  the  Greek 
language  became  at  that  time  the  principle  medium  of  religious 
thought,  the  changed  and  better  economy  was  called  in  that 
language  the  KaLvrj  Atad-^Kij,  in  contradistinction  to  the  UaXuLa 
Aiad-^KT}-,  hence  in  Latin,  which  later  preponderated  as  the 
vehicle  of  religious  thought,  the  terms  were  rendered  by  Vetus 
and  Novum  Testamentum,  whence  come  our  equivalent  Eng- 
lish terms. 

The  books  of  the  Old  Testament  can,  from  their  very  nature, 
be  easily  divided  into  three  great  classes :  The  Law,  the 
Prophets,  and  the  Hagiographa.  Such  division,  in  fact,  existed 
among  the  Jews  from  the  very  earliest  times,  but  their  arbi- 
trary, ill  founded  ranging  of  the  different  books  under  each 
particular  class  renders  their  data  worthless.  By  their  division, 
we  must  include  Daniel  among  the  Hagiographa,  while  Josue, 
Judges,  Samuel,  and  Kings  are  enrolled  among  the  Prophets. 
Of  course  the  Law  remained  ever  and  with  all  a  unique  element, 
admitting  no  other  book  to  be  classified  with  itself.  Many 
try  to  assign  reasons  for  the  classification  of  the  Jews.  We  are 
not  minded  to  do  this.  It  is  to  us  a  groundless,  worthless 
division,  never  adopted  by  any  writer  of  modern  times.  There 
was  also  in  vogue  among  the  Jews  a  well  known  liturgical  sec- 
tion  of   Holy  Scripture,  the  Hl/^D  CL^'DH^  oi"  five  volumes  : 

The  Canticle  of  Canticles,  Ruth,  the  Lamentations  of  Jeremias, 
Ecclesiastes  and  Esther.  These  formed  a  collection  which  was 
wont  to  be  read  on  certain  festal  days  of  the  year. 

Our  Saviour  and  the  Apostles  oft  divided  the  Old  Testa- 
ment in  two  great  divisions,  the  Law  and  the  Prophets ;  thus, 
in  a  general  way,  designating  all  that  was  subsequent  to  the 
Law  as  the  Prophets. 

The  Jews  were  wont  also  to  divide  the  Pentateuch  into  lit- 
urgical divisions  which  they  call  nti^'"*)Df  from  root  tl^'IS,  to  ex- 

T     TT  -T 

pound.  These  were  first  arranged  so  that  every  third  year  the 
Pentateuch  was  totally  read  in  the  synagogues.  Now,  how- 
ever, the  Babylonian  mode  prevails  in  all  the  synagogues,  which 
divides  the  Pentateuch  in  fifty-four  parashas,  so  arranged  that, 


40        THE  CANON  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

by  reading  them  on  every  Saturday,  they  finish  the  Pentateuch 
within  the  course  of  the  year.  To  this  usage  St.  James 
alludes,  Acts  XV,  21 :  "  For  Moses  of  old  time  hath  in  every 
city  them  that  preach  him  in  the  synagogues,  where  he  is  read 
every  Sabbath."  These  parashas  are  designated  in  the  Hebrew 
text  of  the  Pentateuch  by  three  Q*  or  three  Q*  They  are 
designated  by  Q*  if  the  section  begins  on  the  beginning  of  the 
line ;  by  0»  if  it  begins  in  the  middle  of  the  Hne.  The  Q*  is 
initial  for   nlninC/  ^/^«  5    to  signify  that  the  section   is  an 

open  one,  as  it  begins  with  the  line  ;  while  D*  is  initial  for 
nlDinp^  closed;   implying   that   the   section    is   shut   up,    as 

it  were,  beginning  in  the  middle  of  the  line.  Thus,  for  instance, 
the  first  parasha.  Gen.  I,  i — VI,  8  inclusively,  is  open  ;  so  also 
the  second,  extending  from  VI,  9 — XI,  inclusively,  is  open  and 
designated  by  three  ©♦  The  parasha,  enclosed  from  Gen. 
XXVIII,  II — XXXII,  3.  inclusively,  is  closed,  and  designated 
by  three  D*  The  parashas  were  subdivided  into  minor  sections, 
designated  in  the  Hebrew  text  by  single  ^*  or  D*  ^s  they  re- 
spectively began  either  in  the  beginning  or  middle  of  a  line. 
Later,  they  conjoined  the  reading  of  select  portions  of  the 
Prophets  to  the  sections  of  the  Law.  They  called  these 
niC^Drir  from  root  *1[0D/  to  dismiss  ;  because,  after  they  were 

T  T  :    -  -  T 

read,  the  people  were  dismissed.  It  was  in  accordance 
with  this  usage,  that  Jesus  Christ  at  Nazareth  read  in  the  syna- 
gogue the  passage  from  Isaias,  Luke  IV,  16 — 19.  This  haftara 
is  not  now  found  among  those  assigned  for  synagogical  read- 
ings. The  antimessianic  tendency  of  the  Jews  has  probably 
expunged  it. 

Setting  aside,  therefore,  Rabbinical  opinions,  we  can  easily 
arrange  all  the  books  under  the  three  great  heads.  First,  the 
Law,  comprising  the  five  books  of  Moses  ;  second,  the  Prophets, 
comprising  the  four  great  Prophets  and  the  twelve  minor 
Prophets,  and  lastly,  the  Hagiographa,  composed  of  all  the  re- 
maining books.  However,  modern  writers  find  it  commodious 
to  divide  the  books  in  still  another  way,  to  facilitate  their 
treatment.  In  this  modern  division,  the  motive  of  classification 
is  the  nature  of  the  theme  of  the  book.  They  thus  divide 
them  into  Historical,  Sapiential,  Poetic,  and  Prophetic  books. 
We  shall  employ  this  division  in  our  Special  Introduction  to 
the  different  books. 

The  well  known  division  of  both  Testaments  into  the  pro- 
tocanonical  and  deuterocanonical  books  seems  to  have  first  been 
employed  by  Sixtus  Sennensis  (1520 — 1569).     In  his  BibHo- 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT.         41 

theca  Sancta,  Book  I,  Sec.  i,  he  writes  thus  :  "The  Canonical 
books  of  the  first  order  we  may  caSS.  protocanonical ;  the  Canon- 
ical books  of  the  second  order  were  formerly  called  ecclesiasti- 
cal, but  are  now  by  us  termed  deuterocanonicaiy  Although 
retaining  and  making  use  of  this  nomenclature,  we  in  no  wise 
attribute  an  inferior  degree  of  dignity  to  the  books  of  the 
second  canon  ;  they  are  in  such  respect  equal,  as  God  is  the 
author  of  all  of  them.  We  designate  by  the  name  oi  protocan- 
onical,  the  books  concerning  whose  divine  origin  no  doubts 
ever  existed  ;  while  the  deuterocanonical  books  are  those  con- 
cerning which  greater  or  less  doubts  were  entertained  for  a 
time  by  some,  till  finally  the  genuinity  of  the  books  was 
acknowledged,  and  they  were  solemnly  approved  by  the  Church. 

The  deuterocanonical  books  of  the  Old  Testament  are  seven  : 
Tobias,  Judith,  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  Baruch  and  the  two 
books  of  Maccabees.  Together  with  these,  there  are  deutero- 
canonical fragments  of  Esther,  (from  the  4th  verse  of  10  to  24 
verse  of  16  chapter,  and  Daniel  III,  24 — 90 ;  XIII,  XIV).  The 
deuterocanonical  books  of  the  New  Testament  are  also  seven 
in  number :  The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  the  Epistle  of  St. 
James,  the  Second  Epistle  of  St.  Peter,  the  Second  and  Third 
Epistle  of  St.  John,  the  Epistle  of  St.  Jude,  and  the  Apocalypse 
of  St.  John.  There  are  also  deuterocanonical  fragments  of 
Mark,  XVI,  9—20;  Luke  XXII,  43—44  ;  and  John  VII,  53— 
VIII,  II.  Many  of  the  protestants  reject  ali  the  deuterocan- 
onical books,  and  apply  to  them  the  term  Apocryphal.  It 
shall  be  a  part  of  our  labors  to  defend  the  equal  authority  of 
these  books. 

The  Jewish  mode  of  enumeration  of  their  Holy  Books  was 
as  arbitrary  and  as  worthless  as  was  their  system  of  division. 
Taking  twenty-two,  the  number  of  the  letters  of  their  alphabet, 
as  a  number  of  mystic  signification,  they  violently  made  the 
number  of  the  Books  of  Holy  Scripture  conform  thereto. 
Josephus  makes  use  of  this  mode  of  enumeration.  In  his  de- 
fense against  Apion,  he  says  :  "  For  we  have  not  an  innumer- 
able multitude  of  books  among  us  [as  the  Greeks  have),  dis- 
agreeing from  and  contradicting  one  another,  but  only  twenty- 
two  books,  which  contain  the  records  of  all  past  times  ;  which 
are  justly  believed  to  be  divine."  [Contra  Apion  I,  8].  St. 
Jerome  also,  in  his  famous  Prologus  Galeatus  to  the  Books  of 
Kings,  testifies  of  the  existence  of  such  number,  and  explains 
its  mystic  foundation  :  "  As  there  are  twenty-two  elements, 
by  which  we  write  in  Hebrew  all  that  which  we  speak,  so 
twenty-two  volumes  are  computed  by  which,  as  by  letters  and 


42        THE  CANON  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

rudiments,  the  tender  and  suckling  infancy  of  the  just  man  is 
trained  in  the  doctrine  of  God."  "  And  thus  there  are  of  the 
Old  Law  twenty-two  books  ;  five  of  Moses,  eight  of  the  Proph- 
ets, and  nine  of  the  Hagiographa.  Some,  however,  reckon 
Ruth  and  the  Lamentations  among  the  Hagiographa,  and  con- 
sider that  these  are  to  be  numbered  in  their  individual  number, 
and  thus  they  think  to  be  of  the  Old  Law  twenty-four  books, 
which  John  personifies  in  the  number  of  the  twenty-four 
Ancients  who  adore  the  Lamb."  We  see  then  that  there  were 
two  modes  of  enumeration,  and  the  Fathers  mixed  these  modes 
in  trying  to  conform  their  enumeration  with  the  Jewish  tradi- 
tion. We  can  not  tell  who  was  the  first  to  find  a  mystic  rela- 
tion between  the  Greek  alphabet  of  twenty-four  letters  and 
the  twenty-four  books,  but  it  must  have  been  done  after  the 
preponderance  of  the  Hellenistic  influence.  The  appended 
schema  will  more  vividly  illustrate  the  Jewish  mode  of  enum- 
eration of  the  Holy  Books  : 

1.    i<*  ri^irXnj  --------  Genesis. 

2.  2*  nto^  n^xi Exodus. 

3.  y  i<^p11  --------      Leviticus. 

4.  ^^*  ^2n*'1  --------      Numbers. 

5.  n^D'ID^nn^H    _     _     _     _    Deuteronomy. 

6.  r  j;C^1n^ Jehoshua. 

7.  rn^llD^PS^-     _    -     -    Judges  and  Ruth. 

r>  «.«   L^«,pi..*4  (Samuel  I  and  II,  commonly 

5.  n     75SiD;?  -    -  I  called  I  and  II  Kings. 

Ck  *M*  ■Bkfc^^Lws  (Kings  I  and  II,  commonly 

y.  U    U'J7Q  -    -]  called  III  and  IV  Kings. 

10.  ^*   in;y^^^ Isaias. 

-t-i      m,*  ^s^i.^*,    «.«>««i^«k^  Heremias  and  The 

11.  y  mrp)   inp-l^  -     -       |  lamentations. 

12.  !'*!'i<pTri^ Ezechiel. 

fHosea,   Joel,   Amos, 

10      -^i^n^i-^n  n^S>^*i^    -     -     Obadia,Jona,  Micha, 

13.  "li|^^  nr)  D^N'?;  jNahum,      Habakuk. 

Literally  the  twelve  Prophets,  whom  we  Zephania,  Haggai, 
designate  as  the  twelve  minor  Prophets,  [y^t^y.-.^  Malarhia 
These,  by  theJews,  were  computed  as  one  book    '-^cn.iidiici,      ivididunia. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT.         43 

14.  y  D^?nn  *1SD    Liber  Laudum,  or  The  Psalms. 

15.  D*  ^?^D  -     -     -      The  Proverbs  of  Solomon. 

16.  ^''nVii Job. 

17.  ?^'bii^:i Daniel. 

18.  )i'  Xlty.   - E^ra  I  and  II. 

19.  P*D'^D^n^13^       -    -     Chronicles,  I  and  II. 

20.  n^inpi^ Esther. 

21.  ^*  ^^.'n'}P     ------       Ecclesiastes. 

22.  ri*  D'^*1*''^n  ^^t^    -  The  Canticle  of  Canticles. 

By  separating  Ruth  from  Judges,  and  the  Lamentations 
from  Jeremiah,  twenty-four  books  resulted,  and  these  are  the 
books  of  the  Jewish  Canon,  or  as  it  is  commonly  called  the 
Canon  of  Ezra,  from  his  supposed  influence  upon  it.  As  no 
doubts  have  ever  arisen  concerning  these  books,  they  have 
been  called  the  protocanonical  works  or  books  of  the  First 
Canon.  Which  mode  of  computation  is  prior,  it  is  impossible  to 
ascertain  with  certainty.  Loisy  believes  the  number  twenty- 
four  to  be  prior,  as  it  seems  to  be  the  Talmudic  number. 
Against  this  is  the  authority  of  Josephus,  who  speaks  of  the 
number  twenty-two  as  the  sole  traditional  one.  A  question  of 
so  little  importance  may  well  be  left  in  its  uncertainty. 

Chapter  VI. 
Ezra  and  his  Influence. 

The  History  of  the  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament  is  obscure 
and  difficult,  through  default  of  reliable  documents.  In  trac- 
ing it  through  its  remote  antiquity,  we  shall  endeavor  to  bring 
forth  in  their  clearest  light  the  certain  data,  filling  up  the 
lacunas  by  the  best  warranted  conjectures. 

The  nucleus  of  the  Old  Law  was  the  Pentateuch,  or  five 
books  of  Moses.  Around  this  centre  of  development  was 
aggregated  all  the  Sacred  writings  of  the  Jews.  It  was  the 
niln^  the  Law,  par  excellence,  the  divine  book.     The  sub- 

T 

sequent  books,  even  though  by  them  considered  divine,  were 
never  held  equal  in  dignity  to  "  the  Law  by  the  hand  of 
Moses".     They  were  but  adjuncts,  participating  in  the  great 


44  EZRA  AND   HIS  INFLUENCE. 

fount.     As  less  reverence  was  entertained  for  these  later  works, 
so  less  care  was  taken  in  their  preservation. 

The  Pentateuch  was  kept  in  the  temple  ;  it  was  the  warrant 
of  Israel's  preeminence  over  all  the  nations  of  the  earth.  It 
needed  no  authority  to  canonize  it ;  the  character  of  its  author, 
and  the  nature  of  its  contents  were  all  sufficient.  No  other 
book  in  Israel  was  equal  to  it. 

The  other  books  came  into  being  by  degrees.  Most  of  them 
were  first  written  as  detached  chronicles,  annals,  or  diaries,  and 
subsequently  compiled  into  their  respective  volumes.  The 
Jews  revered  them,  and  acknowledged  their  divinity,  but  there 
was  not,  at  least  before  Ezra's  time,  any  central  authority 
charged  with  the  office  of  fixing  the  canon.  Neither  was 
there,  before  his  time,  any  official  list  of  the  books  of  Holy 
Scripture.  This  is  clearly  proven  by  many  proofs,  i.  The 
Samaritan  Codex  contains  only  the  Pentateuch.*  Had  the 
other  books  been  placed  in  a  canon  with  the  Pentateuch  the 
existence  here  of  the  isolated  Pentateuch  would  be  inexplica- 
ble. We  may  not  say  with  certainty  at  what  date  the  Samari- 
tan Codex  was  written,  but  the  most  probable  opinion  would 
fix  such  date  soon  after  the  Schism  of  the  ten  tribes.  (975 
B.  C.)  Comely,  in  his  Introduction  in  Libros  Veteris  Testa- 
menti  maintains  that,  even  before  the  time  of  Ezra,  there 
existed  a  collection  of  sacred  books,  conjoined  to  the  books  of 
Moses.  His  argument  to  prove  this  is  that  there  is  evidence 
that  the  subsequent  books  were  known  and  revered  by  the 
Jews,  and  that  the  preceding  Prophets  influenced  the  later 
ones.  Loisy,  in  refuting  this,  rightly  says  that  it  is  quite 
another  thing  to  assert  that  an  official  collection  had  been  con- 
stituted and  to  say  that  divers  books  existed,  were  known,  and 
were  revered.  We  hold  that  these  books  as  they  came  into 
being  were  received  by  the  Jews,  but  that  no  list  was  made  of 
them  and  the  sole  motive  of  their  inspired  character  was  the 
nature  of  the  writing,  and  the  authority  of  their  authors. 
There  is  no  convincing  data  that  the  Prophets  were  commis- 
sioned by  God  to  determine  the  canon  of  Scripture.  There 
seems  to  be  sufficient  evidence  to  conclude  that,  previous  to 
the  time  of  Ezra,  the  five  books  of  Moses  occupied  a  unique 
place  in  the  literature  of  the  Jews.  It  was  the  written  Consti- 
tution of  Israel's  Jahvistic  polity.  At  times  of  great  defection 
in  religion,  even  the  Thorah  fell  into  disuse  and  oblivion.    Thus 

*The  Samaritan  Codex  contains  a  spurious  text  of  the  book  of  Josue, 
but  it  is  evident  that  it  is  a  later  interpolation. 


EZRA   AND   HIS   INFLUENCE.  45 

the  passage  in  II  Kings  XXII,  8:  "And  Helcias  the  high 
priest  said  to  Saphan  the  scribe  :  *  I  have  found  the  book  of 
the  Law  in  the  house  of  the  Lord  '  ;  and  Helcias  gave  the  book 
to  Saphan,  and  he  read  it",  implies  a  preexisting  period  of 
neglect  and  disuse  of  the  Thorah.  In  those  fierce  idolatrous 
upheavals  in  Israel,  a  stiff  necked  people,  led  by  an  impious 
king,  soon  reduced  all  to  religious  anarchy.  In  the  restoration 
of  the  divine  worship  by  Josias,  no  mention  is  made  of  any 
other  book  than  the  Law.  Had  the  other  books  formed  a  col- 
lection with  the  Pentateuch,  they  could  hardly  be  passed  over 
in  such  complete  silence. 

The  Pentateuch  then  from  the  beginning  was  always  the 
basis  and  directing  principle  of  the  religious  and  national  life  of 
the  Jewish  people.  It  suffered  some  vicissitudes  in  the  various 
religious  defections  of  that  people,  but  in  their  return  to 
Jahve's  Law,  the  Pentateuch  was  the  centre  of  their  reorgani- 
zation. 

The  other  books  came  into  being  by  gradual  growth.  Most 
of  these  contained  data  that  by  living  tradition  was  well  known 
to  the  people.  The  books  formed  a  scattered  sacred  literature. 
The  writings  of  the  Prophets  gradually  were  collected  by  their 
disciples  and  by  the  learned  in  Israel.  Thus  copies  of  the 
books  subsequent  to  the  Pentateuch  existed  in  many  places 
through  the  nation,  but  they  were  not  united  with  the  Thorah, 
nor  considered  of  equal  dignity  with  it. 

We  come  now  to  deal  with  Ezra  and  his  influence  on  Scrip- 
ture. The  Babylonian  Captivity,  wrought  by  Nabuchadnezzar, 
had  overthrown  all  the  institutions  of  Israel.  The  temple  was 
destroyed ;  the  priests  dispersed  and  led  into  captivity ;  the 
Holy  Books  in  a  state  of  disorder,  and  Jahve's  altars  demol- 
ished. To  bring  Israel  out  of  her  religious  disorder,  Ezra  was 
sent  with  full  power  from  Artaxerxes.  His  fitness  for  his  com- 
mission may  be  inferred  from  I.  Ezra  VII,  6:  "  "^ISlD   ^^IHl 

TW'O  ni1n3  "TTID  "  "  ^"^^  he  was  a  ready  scribe  in  the 
Law  of  Moses."  Of  Ezra's  work  as  the  restorer  of  Jahve's 
worship,  and  the  reorganizer  of  Israel's  polity,  we  have  certain 
data.  Concerning,  however,  the  nature  and  extent  of  his 
labors  on  the  Divine  Books,  we  can  only  form,  at  most,  proba- 
ble judgments,  and,  full  oft,  but  conjectural  opinions. 

Up  to  our  days,  the  belief  has  been  almost  general  that 
Ezra  revised  the  sacred  books,  and  fixed  the  Canon.  That  he 
wrought  some  important  effects  on  the  Sacred  Books,  we  may 
not  reasonably  doubt.     But  to  determine  the  exact  nature  and 


46  EZRA  AND   HIS   INFLUENCE. 

extent  of  his  influence  is  impossible,  through  defect  of  docu- 
ments. In  all  questions  of  this  nature,  the  judgments  of  men 
will  be  divergent.  And  so  in  this  question  men  have  thought 
differently.  The  preponderance  of  Catholic  thought  has  been 
that  Ezra  compiled  and  fixed  the  Canon.  Prominent  among 
those  who  have  held  this  opinion  are  Serarius,  Bellarmine,  Bon- 
frere,  Huet,  Frassen  ;  and  more  recently  Welte,  Herbst,  Glaire, 
Scholz,  Himpel,  Ubaldi,  and  Comely.  The  most  eminent 
Catholic  writers  who  reject,  in  whole  or  part,  the  old  theory  of 
the  constitution  of  the  Canon  by  Ezra  are  Richard  Simon,  Mov- 
ers, Nickes,  Malou,  Danko,  and  Loisy. 

As  rationalistic  principles  have  thoroughly  pervaded  the 
protestant  scriptural  thought  currents,  I  think  that  it  will  not 
aid  in  our  investigation  to  bring  forth  and  classify  the  protes- 
tant opinions  concerning  the  influence  of  Ezra  on  the  Jewish 
Canon. 

The  Talmud  furnishes  us  some  curious  data  on  the  Canon. 
The  treatise  of  the  Mischna  called  fltD^  "'D'lS*  (The  Chapters 
of  The  Fathers)  opens  with  a  testimony  concerning  Holy 
Scripture :  "  Moses  received  the  Law  on  Sinai  and  delivered 
it  to  Jehoshua.  Jehoshua  delivered  it  to  the  Elders.  The 
Elders  delivered  it  to  the  Prophets.  The  Prophets  delivered 
it  to  the  men  of  the  Great  Synagogue.  The  Talmudic  treatise 
{^"in^  ^D2'  (The  Last  Gate)  of  the  Babylonic  Gemara  is  more 

T   :    ^       T   T 

explicit.*  In  folios  14  b  and  15  <?,  it  is  written :  "  Who  wrote 
the  Holy  Books?  Moses  wrote  his  book,  the  section  concern- 
ing Bileam  and  Job.  Jehoshua  wrote  his  book  and  eight  verses 
in  the  Law.  Samuel  wrote  his  book,  the  book  of  Judges  and 
Ruth.  David  wrote  the  book  of  Psalms  by  means  of  ten  An- 
cients, Adam,  the  first,  Melchisedech,  Abraham,  Moses,  Heman, 
Iduthun,  Asaph  and  the  three  sons  of  Kore.  Jeremias  wrote 
his  book,  the  Book  of  Kings  and  the  Lamentations.  Ezechias 
and  his  colleagues  wrote  Isaias,  Proverbs,  the  Canticle  of  Can- 
ticles, and  Ecclesiastes.  The  men  of  the  Great  Synagogue 
wrote  Ezechiel,  the  twelve  Prophets,  Daniel,  and  the  volume 
of  Esther.  Ezra  wrote  his  book,  and  continued  the  genealogies 
of  the  Chronicles  up  to  his  time. 

In  this  testimony  properly  understood,  there  is  nothing 
impossible.  The  presence  there  of  the  names  Adam,  Mel- 
chisedech, Abraham,  and  Moses  as  contemporaries  of  David 

*The  commentatorial  treatises  of  the  Gemara  were  called  gates,  since 
they  (ypened  tlie  way  for  the  intelligence  of  the  different  truths. 


EZRA  AND   HIS  INFLUENCE.  47 

has  caused  much  discussion  among  those  who  thought  these  to 
be  the  original  patriarchs.  Such  is  evidently  not  the  case. 
By  these  names  the  talmudists  meant  not  the  patriarchs  but 
contemporaries  of  David,  who  bore  the  names  of  Israel's  ances- 
tral patriarchs.  Thus  we  have  among  the  Rabbis  of  the  mid- 
dle ages  Solomon,  Moses,  David,  etc.  This  point  is  so  evident 
that  I  shall  not  dwell  more  upon  it.  Thus  understood,  the 
testimony  is,  at  least,  not  impossible,  and  shows  us  that,  at  its 
writing,  the  Jewish  canon,  comprising  the  protocanonical  books 
was  fixed.  The  attribution  of  the  Authorship  of  Isaias  to 
Ezechias  most  probably  means  that  he  compiled  into  a  volume 
the  disconnected  documents  and  diaries  left  by  the  prophet. 
We  say  this  simply  to  show  the  possibility  of  the  testimony, 
not  to  advocate  its  opinion. 

We  now  join  with  these  testimonies,  that  of  the  apocryphal 
fourth  book  of  Ezra,  IV  Ezra  XIV,  22—26:  "  For  if  I  have 
found  favor  in  thee,  send  in  me  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  I  will 
write  all  that  which  was  done  in  time  since  the  beginning,  the 
things  that  were  written  in  thy  law,  that  men  might  find  the 
path  ;  and  let  those  who  would  live  in  the  last  days  live.  And 
he  made  answer  to  me  and  said :  '  Go  and  summon  thy  people, 
and  say  to  them  that  they  shall  not  seek  thee  for  forty  days, 
and  do  thou  prepare  for  thyself  many  writing  tablets,  and  take 
with  thee  Sarea,  Dabrea,  Salemia,  Echan  and  Asiel,  those  five, 
who  are  able  to  write  quickly,  and  come  hither,  and  I  will  en- 
kindle in  thy  heart  the  light  of  intellect,  which  shall  not  be 
extinguished  until  thou  wilt  have  finished  the  things  thou  shalt 
have  begun  to  write.  And  then,  a  part  thou  shall  openly 
manifest  to  the  perfect,  and  a  part  thou  shalt  deliver  secretly 
to  the  wise ;  on  the  morrow,  at  this  hour,  thou  shalt  begin  to 
write."  Ibidem,  38 — 47.  "  And  I  was  brought  to  the  morrow  ; 
and,  behold,  a  voice  called  me  saying:  'Ezra,  open  thy  mouth 
and  drink  that  which  I  will  give  thee  to  drink.*  And  I  opened 
my  mouth,  and  behold  a  full  cup  was  held  out  to  me.  This 
was  filled  with  water,  and  the  color  thereof  as  of  fire.  And  I 
took  and  drank ;  and  when  I  had  drunk,  my  heart  was  exceed- 
ingly filled  with  knowledge,  and  in  my  bosom  wisdom  grew. 
For  the  memory  of  my  spirit  was  strengthened.  And  my 
mouth  was  opened,  and  was  no  more  closed.  The  Most 
High  gave  understanding  to  the  five  men,  and  they  wrote  the 
visions  of  the  night  which  were  told  them,  and  which  they 
knew  not.  And  at  night  they  ate  bread.  But  I  spoke  through 
the  day,  and  through  the  night  I  was  not  silent.  And  there 
were  written,  during  forty  days,  204  books.     And  it  came  to 


48  EZRA  AND   HIS   INFLUENCE. 

pass,  after  forty  days,  the  Most  High  spoke  saying :  *  The  first 
things  thou  hast  written  make  openly  manifest,  and  let  the 
worthy  and  the  unworthy  read  ;  but  the  latter  seventy  pre- 
serve, that  thou  mayest  give  them  to  the  wise  men  of  thy 
people.  For  in  these  is  the  vein  of  understanding,  and  the 
fount  of  wisdom,  and  the  stream  of  knowledge.'    And  I  did  so." 

Up  to  the  eighteenth  century,  the  Latin  of  the  Vulgate  was 
the  only  text  preserved  to  us  of  IV  Ezra.  Since  then,  there 
have  been  discovered  the  Arabic,  Ethiopian,  Syriac,  and  Ar- 
menian versions.  In  these  the  whole  number  of  books  is 
placed  at  ninety-four  instead  of  204  ;  whence,  if  we  subtract  the 
seventy  which  were  to  remain  hidden  for  the  sole  use  of  the 
wise  men,  we  shall  have  the  traditional  number,  twenty-four,  of 
the  Jewish  Canon. 

Cornely  makes  much  of  this  testimony  as  being  built  upon 
the  true  basis  of  Jewish  tradition.  I  confess,  though  admitting 
some  basis  of  truth,  I  can  not  find  anything  in  it  that  would 
convince  the  intellect  that  Ezra  fixed  the  Canon.  The  role  of 
Ezra  as  second  promulgator  of  the  Law  would  be  sufficient 
basis  for  the  rabbinical  fable. 

We  have  not  adduced  these  testimonies  as  peremptory 
proofs  of  anything.  They  are  all  more  or  less  imbued  with 
rabbinic  fable.  But,  perhaps,  there  may  be  some  slight  truth 
in  these,  which  has  been  distorted  by  the  vagaries  of  the  Rab- 
bis, till  it  is  hard  to  glean  it  from  the  composite  mass. 

I  believe  that  the  tradition  of  the  Christian  Fathers  will 
give  us  small  help  in  this  investigation.  As  it  was  merely  a 
critical  question,  and,  in  no  wise,  connected  with  faith,  the 
authority  of  the  Fathers  could  only  be  considered  in  its  critical 
character.  Now  it  is  evident  to  the  tyro  of  patrology  that  the 
Fathers  are  least  valuable  as  critics.  As  simple  witnesses  of 
the  faith,  they  are  beacon  lights;  but  when  we  turn  to  their 
critical  character,  we  find  little  of  value.  Most  of  those  who 
have  delivered  to  us  that  Ezra  fixed  the  Canon,  based  their 
assertions  on  the  IV  Book  of  Ezra,  a  book  filled  with  rabbinic 
fable,  impossible  superstition,  and  erroneous  dogma.  St. 
Irenaeus,  St.  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Tertullian,  St.  Basil, 
Theodoret,  St.  Optatus  and  others  have  relied  implicitly  on  the 
testimony  of  IV  Ezra.  Some,  as  St.  Chrysostom,  St.  Isidore 
of  Seville,  St.  Bede,  have  tried  to  make  the  passage  of  IV  Ezra 
credible  by  restricting  the  character  of  Ezra  within  somewhat 
narrower  bounds.  See  Loisy,  Hist,  du  Canon  de  I'Ancien 
Testament. 


EZRA  AND   HIS  INFLUENCE.  49 

Having  brought  forth  these  preliminary  testimonies,  we  now 
proceed  to  more  closely  examine  the  question  of  Ezra's  influ- 
ence on  the  Scripture.  Ezra  restored  the  Jahvistic  worship, 
and  promulgated  the  Law.  This  rests  on  the  clear  testimony 
of  an  inspired  book.  The  8th  and  9th  Chapters  of  the  II  Book 
of  Ezra  firmly  establish  the  character  of  Ezra  as  reorganizer  of 
Israel  and  promulgator  of  the  Law ;  but  when  we  would  ex- 
tend his  influence  on  the  Scripture  further  than  this,  we  are 
unsustained  by  certain  data.  In  view  of  these  facts,  it  is  well 
to  first  set  forth  what  Ezra  did  not  do,  and,  secondly,  proceed 
to  establish  the  most  reasonable  probable  judgments  concern- 
ing what  he  did  do.  We  place,  therefore,  as  a  thesis,  that  there 
are  no  adequate  data  to  establish  that  Ezra  promulgated  an 
offlcial  list  of  the  Holy  Books  of  the  Jews ;  but,  on  the  con- 
trary, probable  data  seem  to  warrant  that  no  such  official  list 
was  ever  promulgated  among  the  Jews  by  any  authority. 

To  prove  this  thesis,  we  find  one  convincing  proof  in  the 
fact  that  there  is  not  a  testimony  in  the  patrimony  of  scriptural 
science  which  asserts  any  such  fact.  Men,  it  is  true,  have 
asserted  such  fact ;  but  they  lacked  one  requisite  element  of  a 
faithful  witness,  knowledge  of  the  fact.  The  Fathers  followed 
the  pseudo  Ezra ;  hence,  their  authority  is  no  greater  than  his, 
which  is  nothing.  The  Babba  Bathra  of  the  Talmud,  quoted 
above,  speaks  of  the  Scripture  as  though  reduced  to  definite 
list,  but  its  authority,  even  though  believed  implicitly,  would 
prove  nothing  for  the  supposed  character  of  Ezra.  The  Babba 
Bathra  does  not  antedate  the  second  century  of  the  Christian 
era,  and,  at  that  time,  the  list  of  the  Jewish  Canon  was  com- 
plete, not  by  definite  authority,  but  by  the  common  consent  of 
the  Jewish  people  and  its  teachers.  The  Babba  Bathra  does 
not  attribute  the  fixing  of  the  Canon  to  Ezra,  and  no  other 
document  worthy  of  faith  does  so.  I  think  that  a  fact  of  such 
importance  would  not  be  passed  over  in  silence,  while  so  many 
others  of  much  less  importance  are  detailed  to  us  in  the  books 
of  Ezra,  Nehemias,  and  the  Maccabees. 

The  Talmud  records  many  disputes  concerning  the  canon- 
icity  of  some  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament.  Behold  an 
example  :  "  Rabbi  Juda  has  said  that  the  Canticle  of  Canticles 
defiles  the  hands;  but  Ecclesiastes  is  contested.*  Rabbi 
Joseph  said  :    "  Ecclesiastes  does  not  defile  the  hands."    Rabbi 

*To  render  the  hands  impure  was  the  rabbinic  expression  to  express 
that  a  book  was  inspired,  as  they  must  needs  wash  their  hands  after 
touching  an  inspired  book. 


60  EZRA   AND   HIS   INFLUENCE. 

Simon  said :  "The  disciples  of  Schammai  judged  more  un- 
favorably of  Ecclesiastes  than  the  disciples  of  Hillel."  Rabbi 
Simeon,  son  of  Azai,  said  :  "  I  have  learned  from  every  one  of 
the  mouths  of  the  seventy  ancients  that  this  question  was 
settled  when  Rabbi  Eleazar,  son  of  Azarias,  was  installed  in 
office."  Rabbi  Akiba  said  :  *'  May  it  please  God,  no  Israelite 
has  ever  doubted  that  the  Canticle  of  Canticles  defiles  the 
hands.  The  world  has  nothing  more  precious  than  the  day  on 
which  the  Canticle  of  Canticles  was  given  to  Israel.  All  the 
Hagiographa  are  holy,  but  the  Canticle  of  Canticles  is  most 
holy.  If  discussion  has  existed,  it  was  concerning  Ecclesiastes." 
Rabbi  Jochanan,  son  of  Josue,  son  of  the  father-in-law  of 
Rabbi  Akiba,  said  :  "  It  was  discussed  and  decided  as  has  said 
the  son  of  Azai."  Tr.  Jadaim  III,  5.  Again  :  "  The  doctors 
wished  to  place  in  obscurity  the  Book  of  Ecclesiastes,  for  reason 
that  its  discourses  were  contrary  to  the  Law.  Why  did  they 
not  place  it  apart  ?  Because  it  begins  and  ends  with  the  words 
of  the  Law."     Tr.  Sabbath  30. 

These  contentions  among  the  Talmudists  give  evidence  of 
doubts  concerning  various  books  of  Scripture.  If  the  Canon 
had  been  made  out  and  promulgated  by  Ezra,  would  not  his 
authority  have  been  cited  here  to  decide  concerning  these 
books?  If,  as  our  opponents  assert,  the  fixing  of  the  Canon 
by  Ezra  rests  on  talmudic  tradition,  we  ought  certainly  to  hear 
some  word  of  him  in  these  disputes.  On  the  contrary,  he  is 
only  mentioned  as  the  author  of  his  book  and  the  continuator 
of  Chronicles. 

The  book  of  Ecclesiasticus,  written  very  probably  about  the 
year  180,  B.  C,  in  Chapters  XLIV  to  XLIX  inclusively,  speaks 
of  Israel's  heroes  and  sages,  and,  although  it  exhorts  that 
Nehemias  be  a  long  time  remembered,  it  has  no  word  of  Ezra. 
This  would  seem  incomprehensible,  had  Ezra  collected  and 
authoritatively  promulgated  the  Canon.  Moreover,  Daniel 
and  Esther  are  not  mentioned  among  the  illustrious  ones  of 
Israel,  and  there  seems  to  be  no  other  credible  reason  than 
that  these  books  had  not,  at  that  date,  entered  the  Jewish 
Canon,  and,  consequently,  were  unknown  to  the  author  of 
Ecclesiasticus. 

The  Jews  of  Palestine,  in  their  second  letter  to  their  con- 
freres of  Alexandria,  make  offer  to  send  them  the  books  that 
Nehemias  and  Judas  had  collected  :  "  And  these  same  things 
were  set  down  in  the  memoirs  and  commentaries  of  Nehemias, 
and  how  he  made  a  library,  and  gathered  the  writings  concern- 
ing the  kings,  and  the  Prophets  and  the  (writings)  of  David, 


EZRA   AND   HIS   INFLUENCE.  51 

ra  Tov  AaviS,  and  the  letters  of  the  kings  treating  of  the  obla- 
tions. And  in  like  manner  Judas  also  gathered  together  all 
such  things  as  were  lost  by  the  war  we  had,  and  they  are  in 
our  possession."  Cornely  would  distort  this  text  till  it  would 
be  made  to  comprise  the  whole  Canon  [Introduction  1,45 — 46.] 
His  attempts  are  too  arbitrary  to  merit  an  extended  notice. 
No  book  would  suffice  to  include  all  we  should  write,  if  we  set 
out  to  refute  every  arbitrary  assertion  that  has  been  made  con- 
cerning the  Holy  Scriptures.  With  Loisy,  we  see  in  this  testi- 
mony a  description  of  a  collection  of  books  of  national  import- 
ance to  Israel,  partly  sacred  and  partly  profane.  It  is  quite 
probable  that  the  sacred  books  therein  included  were  the  first 
and  later  Prophets,  according  to  the  Jewish  mode  of  enumera- 
tion, and  the  Psalms  of  David.  The  other  works  were,  doubt- 
less, epistles  of  the  Persian  Kings,  of  importance  in  the  govern- 
ment of  a  country,  now  a  vassalage  of  Persia.  It  is  plainly 
evident  that  Nehemias  did  not  collect  the  Canon  of  Scripture 
but  a  collection  of  important  books  sacred  and  profane,  which, 
joined  to  the  later  collection  of  Judas  Maccabseus,  formed  a 
sort  of  national  library,  to  a  participation  of  which,  the  Jews  of 
Palestine  invited  their  brothers  of  Alexandria.  This  testimony 
also  is  a  factor  to  refute  the  generally  received  opinion  that 
Ezra  closed  the  Canon.  Most  probably,  he  cooperated  with 
Nehemias  in  this  enterprise  ;  but  the  very  fact  of  a  collection 
of  certain  sacred  books  into  the  national  library  presupposes 
that  no  complete  authentic  list  of  the  Scriptures  was.  in  posses- 
sion of  Israel.  Had  it  been  made  subsequently,  some  trace  of 
it  would  have  been  left  in  the  records  of  the  Jews.  We  be- 
lieve, therefore,  that  the  opinion  which  attributes  to  Ezra  the 
collection  and  closing  of  the  Canon  to  be  devoid  of  historical 
basis  and  untenable. 

We  now  pass  to  consider  what  influence  Ezra  did  exert 
upon  the  Holy  Books.  The  selection  of  him,  "  a  scribe  able  in 
the  Law",  implies  that  there  was  some  reconstruction  of  Holy 
Scripture  for  him  to  do.  We  have  before  said  that  he  promul- 
gated the  Law  to  the  returned  exiles.  What  revision  he 
wrought  on  the  Thorah,  it  is  impossible  to  say,  but  we  are 
ready  to  believe  that  he  revised  in  some  respects  Israel's  great 
code.  He  also  evidently  explained  this  Law  to  the  people,  and 
put  into  execution  its  enactments.  This  is  Ezra's  distinguish- 
ing function  In  history.  As  reorganizer  of  Israel's  polity,  I  am 
ready  to  believe  that  he  did  collect  and  revise  Israel's  sacred 
literature,  and  that  many  books  came  under  his  influence. 
How  many,  we  can  not  say.     We  must  here  simply  rely  on 


52  EZRA  AND   HIS   INFLUENCE. 

conjecture.  But,  from  the  fact  of  the  collection  by  Nehemias, 
one  may  see  that  the  reconstructive  spirit  of  Nehemias  and 
Ezra  tended  to  bring  together  Israel's  sacred  deposit  of  writ- 
ings. They  did  this  without  any  ex  professo  declaration  of 
promulgating  a  Canon  ;  and  it  is  highly  probable  that  not  all 
the  Holy  Books  of  the  first  Canon  were  collected  into  a  body 
of  writings  at  their  epoch.  Gradually  the  sacred  collection  was 
made  up,  and,  at  the  time  of  Christ,  the  Jews  considered  the 
list  of  Holy  Books  as  complete  and  fixed.  The  nucleus  of  the 
collection  was  the  Thorah.  Around  this  centre,  the  Holy 
Books  formed  themselves  into  a  recognized  collection  by  the 
concurrence  of  various  causes,  and  their  warranty  for  entrance 
into  the  sacred  collection  was  not  any  decree  or  order  of  canon- 
ization by  any  authority,  but  the  fact  that  their  contents  were 
comformable  to  the  living  traditions  of  the  people,  and  reflected 
the  things  which  a  tenacious  Eastern  memory  had  learned  from 
Law  and  Prophet. 

Ezra  may  have  revised  many  of  the  Holy  Books ;  he  may 
have  collected  all  those  attainable  at  that  time ;  we  are  ready 
to  admit  his  influence  upon  Scripture  to  have  extended  even 
to  the  correcting  of  the  Pentateuch  ;  but  we  deny  him  an  offi- 
cial promulgation  of  an  incomplete  Canon  of  Scripture,  at  the 
very  time  when  other  books  of  divine  origin  were  in  actual  ex- 
istence, although  not  in  his  posession.  In  the  talmudic  testi- 
monies adduced  above,  mention  is  made  of  a  great  synagogue, 
n^iliin   HD^w   organized  by  Ezra.     Much  that  is  fabulous 

has  been  written  concerning  this  great  synagogue.  Many  reject 
it  in  toto  as  a  rabbinic  fable.  Here  again  historical  data  are 
wanting.  Besides  the  talmudic  authority  already  quoted,  the 
Jews  of  the  middle  age,  Abarbanel,  Abraham  ben  David  and 
Maimonides  recount  that  the  Great  Synagogue  was  composed 
of  1 20  members.  Ezra  was  president,  and  the  Prophets  Hag- 
gai,  Zachary  and  Malachi  were  among  its  members.  It  endured 
from  the  year  444,  B.  C,  down  to  the  time  of  Simon  the  Just, 
about  the  year  200  of  the  Christian  era.  The  writings  of  the 
middle  age  are  characterized  by  the  same  spirit  of  extravagant 
fable  which  robs  the  talmud  of  all  historic  worth,  hence  we  can 
not  treat  these  assertions  as  historic  data.  At  most,  there 
may  be  in  them  a  basic  thread  of  true  tradition,  which  is  well 
nigh  lost  amid  a  web  of  fable.  Even  those  who  have  credul- 
ously accepted  the  legend  of  Ezra's  Canon  have  rejected  the 
story  of  the  Great  Synagogue.  No  convincing  data  are  at 
hand  to  establish  the  existence  of  such  a  body  organized  by 
Ezra,  and  yet  such  an  organization,  though  not  of  such  propor- 


EZRA  AND   HIS   INFLUENCE.  63 

tions  as  the  rabbis  assert,  may  have  been  created  by  him. 
That  a  body  of  men  called  the  Synedrion  or  Sanhedrim  existed 
at  the  opening  of  the  Christian  era  is  not  doubted.  It  is  quite 
certain  that  Christ  referred  to  this  body  in  Math.  V,  22 :  "  But 
I  say  to  you,  that  whosoever  is  angry  with  his  brother,  shall  be 
in  danger  of  the  judgment,  and  whosoever  shall  say  to  his 
brother,    ^p*l/    (cerebro     vacuus),  shall  be  in  danger  of  the 

ITT 

council."  It  is  impossible  to  fix  the  date  of  origin  of  this 
assembly.  Many  Jews  refer  it  back  to  the  origin  of  their  polity 
under  Moses.  Of  course  this  is  a  vagary.  Christian  writers 
diverge  widely  in  their  opinions  concerning  it.  Nothing  certain 
is  available.  Without  admitting  the  fables  of  the  Rabbis, 
might  it  not  be  the  evolution  of  a  legislative  body  organized 
by  Ezra  to  aid  in  administering  the  civil  and  religious  affairs  of 
reorganized  Israel?  The  question,  like  many  others  of  a  like 
nature,  only  admits  of  a  conjectural  answer. 

It  is  certain  that  the  Providence  of  God  entered  as  chief 
factor  in  preserving  the  Holy  Books  through  so  many  vicissi- 
tudes. He,  as  ever,  did  this  suaviter  et  fortiter.  As  he  was 
back  of  the  collection,  they  were  safe,  and  there  is  no  need  of 
bringing  the  unsubstantial  legend  of  Ezra's  Canon  to  protect  a 
collection  of  books  which  the  Providence  of  God  protected  in 
his  own  way.  But  in  the  accessions  to  the  central  nucleus  of 
the  Jewish  Canon,  after  the  fourth  century,  a  distinction  was 
made,  whence  has  sprung  a  leading  question  in  the  history  of 
the  Canon.  Malachi  closes  the  series  of  the  Hebrew  prophets. 
Nothing  certain  is  known  of  the  identity   of   this  Prophet. 

Some  have    believed   the    Hebrew   name    "'^^T'^    (angelus 

•   T :  - 
mens)  to  be  an  appellative  of  Ezra,  or  of  another  Jew  of  that 

period,  designating  the  particular  function  of  the  last  of  the 
Prophets.  Cornely  sustains  by  probable  arguments,  that 
Malachi  is  the  proper  name  of  an  individual.  The  Jews  recog- 
nized in  him  the  last  of  the   Prophets,  and  termed  him   ^H^H 

T 

D'^^''!I3^n     (sigillum      Prophetarum).       Whatever    view     we 

adopt,  Malachi's  period  must  have  been  about  four  hundred 
years  B.  C.  The  accessions  to  the  Palestinian  Canon  sub- 
sequent to  Malachi  were  accorded  a  secondary  rank.  They 
were  by  no  means  considered  as  mere  profane  creations,  but 
from  the  fact  that  the  series  of  the  Prophets  was  closed,  the 
effusion  of  the  Holy  Ghost  was  not  believed  to  be  so  directly 
reflected  in  these  books  as  in  the  others.  This  secondary  in- 
fluence of  the  Holy  Ghost  they  denominated  the  ^^p   ^3 


54  EZRA  AND    HIS   INFLUENCE. 

(filia  vocis).  We  find  in  no  place  an  explicit  enumeration  of 
the  several  books  whose  writers  were  supposed  to  be  actuated 
by  the  da^/i  kol,  but  all  indications  seem  to  evince  that  they 
were  the  deuterocanonical  works  of  the  Old  Testament. 

From  the  first,  these  books  existed  in  the  Alexandrian 
Canon,  which  was  totally  derived  from  the  sacred  books  of  the 
Jews  of  Palestine,  and  the  celebrated  testimony  of  Josephus 
Flavius,  now  to  be  adduced,  clearly  asserts  the  existence  and 
preservation  of  certain  semi-divine  books,  which  had  been  col- 
lected after  the  close  of  prophecy  in  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes 
Longimanus.  Now  these  books  can  be  naught  else  than  the 
deuterocanonical  books  of  the  Old  Testament.  The  testimony 
of  Josephus  exists  in  his  Defense  against  Apion,  Bk.  I,  Parag. 
8  :  "  For  we  have  not  an  innumerable  multitude  of  books  dis- 
agreeing from  and  contradicting  one  another,  as  the  Greeks 
have,  but  only  twenty-two  books,  which  contain  the  records  of 
all  the  past  times,  which  are  justly  believed  to  be  divine.  And 
of  them,  five  belong  to  Moses,  which  contain  his  laws  and  the 
traditions  of  the  origin  of  mankind  till  his  death.  This  interval 
of  time  embraces  nearly  three  thousand  years.  From  the  death 
of  Moses  to  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes,  who  reigned  after  Xerxes, 
the  Prophets  who  were  after  Moses  wrote  down  what  was  done 
in  their  times  in  thirteen  books.  The  remaining  four  books 
contain  hymns  to  God  and  precepts  for  the  conduct  of  human 
life.  It  is  true,  our  history  hath  been  written  since  Artaxerxes 
very  particularly ,  but  hath  not  been  esteemed  of  the  like  authority 
with  the  former  by  our  forefathers,  because  there  hath  not  been 
an  exact  succession  of  Prophets  since  that  time :  and  how  firmly 
we  have  given  credit  to  these  books  of  our  own  nation,  is  evi- 
dent by  what  we  do ;  for  during  so  many  ages  as  have  already 
passed,  no  one  hath  been  so  bold  as  either  to  add  anything  to 
them,  or  take  anything  from  them,  or  make  any  change  in 
them  ;  but  it  is  become  natural  to  all  Jews,  immediately  and 
from  their  very  birth,  to  esteem  these  books  to  contain  divine 
doctrines,  and  to  persist  in  them  and,  if  occasion  be,  willingly 
to  die  for  them." 

Although  some  of  the  deuterocanonical  books  contain  his- 
tory that  must  have  antedated  Artaxerxes,  nevertheless,  as  the 
date  of  their  accession  to  the  Hebrew  Canon  was  subsequent 
to  Artaxerxes,  Josephus  confounds  the  date  of  their  accession 
with  the  date  of  their  origin.  These  books,  then,  existed  in  the 
Palestinian  collection  as  secondarily  divine  books.  The  Talmuds 
of  Jerusalem  and  Babylon  contain  quotations  from  Ecclesiasti- 


EZRA   AND   HIS   INFLUENCE.  55 

cus.  Josephus,  who  was  an  apt  expounder  of  Pharasaic  tradi- 
tions, makes  use  of  the  deuterocanonical  fragments  of  Esther 
and  the  second  book  of  Maccabees. 

Eusebius,  in  the  VI  book  of  his  Ecclesiastical  History, 
Chapter  25,  recording  the  catalogue  of  Scriptures,  after  enu- 
merating the  protocanonical  works,  says :  "  There  are  also  the 
Maccabees  which  are  inscribed  Sarbeth  Sarbaneel"  St.  Hilary 
in  Prol.  in  Psalter,  testifies  that  Tobias  was  read  among  the 
Hagiographa  of  Jews.  St.  Epiphanius  Haer.  VHI.  No.  6, 
testifies  that  Wisdom  and  Ecclesiasticus  were  in  honor  among 
the  Jews,  and  distinguished  from  the  apocryphal  works.  St. 
Isidore  says  of  Wisdom:  "As  a  certain  one  of  those  who 
know  has  recorded,  the  Hebrews  received  this  work  (Wisdom) 
among  the  Canonical  Scriptures.  But  after  they  had  seized 
and  killed  the  Christ,  remembering  the  most  evident  testi- 
monies concerning  Christ  in  that  same  book,  in  which  it  is 
written  :  'The  impious  said  among  themselves,  let  us  seize 
the  just,  etc.,'  taking  counsel,  lest  we  might  lay  upon  them 
such  an  evident  sacrilege,  they  cut  it  off  from  the  prophetic 
volumes,  and  prohibited  its  reading  to  their  people."  The 
Apostolical  Constitutions  testify  that  Baruch  was  read  in  the 
Jewish  synagogues.*  St.  Jerome  testifies  in  his  preface  to  the 
book  of  Judith  that  among  the  Hebrews  Judith  is  read  "  among 
the  Hagiographa."  "  Its  authority,"  he  continues,  "  is  con- 
sidered less  apt  to  decide  things  about  which  there  is  dispute. 
It  is  written  in  Chaldaic,  and  reckoned  among  the  historical 
books."  I  think  it  to  be  a  position  admitting  of  no  reasonable 
doubt  that  the  deuterocanonical  works  of  the  Old  Testament 
primarily  existed  in  the  collection  of  the  Jews  of  Palestine. 
The  narrow,  nugatory,  reactionary,  spirit  of  the  latter  day 
Jews,  exemplified  in  the  Pharisees,  denied  to  these  books 
canonicity,  as  we  understand  the  term ;  but  we  can  find  no 
evidence  that  they  denied  them  a  divine  origin.  They  are  not 
found  in  the  Hebrew  collection  of  books  to-day,  but  this  can 
be  readily  explained.  The  same  spirit  which  moved  the  Jews 
of  Palestine  to  deny  these  books  equal  rank  with  the  others, 
impelled  them  later  to  entirely  exclude  them.     It  would  be 

*The  Constitutiones  Apost.  are  apocryphal  writings  dating  back  to 
the  second  century  of  the  Christian  era.  It  seems  quite  probable  that 
they  originated  in  Syria.  The  only  relation  that  they  bear  to  the  Apostles 
is  that  they  reflect  the  Apostolical  traditions  of  the  times.  They  were 
declared  apocryphal  by  the  decree  of  Gelasius,  but  still  are  of  value 
inasmuch  as  they  preserve  for  us  the  traditions  of  the  first  ages  of 
Christianity. 


66  THE  ALEXANDRIAN   CANON. 

hard  to  fix  the  date  of  this  exclusion.  It  is  probable  that  they 
gradually  died  out  of  the  different  codices,  till,  at  last,  all  trace 
of  them  disappeared  in  the  Palestinian  Canon. 

Chapter  VII. 

The  Alexandrian  Canon. 

Opposite  causes  effected  the  preservation  of  these  books  in 
the  Alexandrian  Canon.  The  Jews  of  Egypt  depended  in 
matters  of  religion  on  the  Jews  of  Palestine.  Abundant  data 
prove  that  they  received  their  collection  of  Holy  Books  from 
Palestine.  This  was  not  accomplished  all  at  once.  It  began 
with  the  translation  of  the  Law,  made  under  Ptolemy  Phila- 
delphus  in  the  third  century  B.  C,  and  continued  down  to  the 
first  Century  B.  C.  The  influence  of  Greek  thought  and  cus- 
toms on  the  Hellenistic  Jews  modified  the  narrow  national 
spirit  of  that  nation.  Later,  in  the  time  of  the  Maccabees,  the 
pagan  Greek  customs  were  readily  adopted  by  the  Jewish 
youth.  This  liberal  trend  of  religious  thought  effected  that 
the  deuterocanonical  books  were  received  and  uitermingled 
promiscuously  with  the  other  books.  It  is  quite  probable  that 
there  was  always  a  certain  degree  of  uncertainty  and  indecision 
in  the  synagogues  of  Alexandria.  The  minute,  sharply  drawn, 
pharasaic  distinctions  did  not  obtain  there.  They  had  left 
home  and  home  traditions,  and  blending  with  a  highly  cultivat- 
ed nation,  even  those  who  clung  to  the  substance  of  the  Mosaic 
covenant,  lost  much  of  their  conservative  spirit.  As  they  read 
the  Scriptures  in  Greek,  the  deuterocanonical  books  were  not 
distinguishable  by  difference  of  tongue  from  the  books  of  the 
first  canon.  On  the  contrary,  in  Palestine  the  Scriptures  were 
inseparably  cast  in  the  mould  of  the  Hebrew  mother  tongue. 
The  strong  love  of  the  Hebrews  for  their  mother  tongue 
would  naturally  incline  the  Jews  of  Palestine  to  look  with  less 
favor  on  a  sacred  book  not  written  in  the  Hebrew  language. 
Now  some  of  the  deuterocanonical  books  such  as  Wisdom  and 
II  Maccabees  were  of  Greek  origin.  It  is  quite  probable  that 
some  of  the  others  were  already  translated  into  Greek  before 
their  aggregation  to  the  sacred  collection,  hence  is  explained 
their  secondary  place  among  the  sacred  books,  and  also  why 
they  are  not  found  in  the  Hebrew  Canon  of  to-day.  It  seems 
also  quite  certain  that  the  Hellenistic  Jews  made  no  distinc- 
tion between  the  protocanonical  and  the  deuterocanonical 
books.  Had  such  distinction  been  made,  the  books  of  second- 
ary importance  would  have  been  relegated  to  the  post  of  an 


THE  ALEXANDRIAN  CANON.  67 

appendage.  Now  the  direct  opposite  is  found  to  have  prevailed. 
Protocanonical  and  deuterocanonical  works  are  indiscriminately 
intermingled  in  the  Alexandrian  Canon.  This  indiscriminate 
adoption  of  the  deuterocanonical  books  was  not  the  canonizing 
of  these  by  the  Alexandrians.  It  was  a  mere  fact,  which  its 
authors  had  never  taken  thought  to  explain.  Had  they 
formally  rendered  equal  these  various  books  by  an  explicit  de- 
claration, it  would  have  led  to  controversy  between  the  Hellen- 
ists and  the  Jews  of  Palestine.  No  trace  of  any  such  contro- 
versy is  found  in  the  records  and  traditions  of  antiquity.  The 
Jews  of  Palestine  were  not  hostile  to  the  deuterocanonical 
works,  but,  from  the  causes  already  enumerated,  refused  to 
accord  them  equal  rank  with  the  others.  The  Jews  of  Alex- 
andria without  deciding  the  issue,  received  and  revered  them 
all,  and  intermingled  them  in  the  sacred  collection. 

There  is  plainly  evident  in  this  fact  the  workings  of  the 
Providence  of  God.  The  Almighty  had  decreed  to  effect  the 
transition  from  the  old  to  the  new  covenant  through  the 
medium  of  Greek  language  and  culture.  Israel  was  to  receive 
the  Christ  in  fulfillment  of  Jahve's  promises,  but  the  great 
gentile  world  was  to  be  the  chosen  people  of  the  New  Coven- 
ant. Under  the  Providence  of  God,  Alexander  the  Great 
brought  the  known  world  under  Greek  influence,  and  gave  it 
the  Greek  language  as  the  medium  of  thought.  The  Romans 
reduced  this  vast  extent  of  territory  to  peace,  without  changing 
the  language.  Thus  two  conditions  favorable  for  the  evangeli- 
zation of  the  world  were  accomplished,  peace  and  a  uniform 
adequate  vehicle  of  thought.  It  is  easy  to  see  how  these  two 
factors  aided  in  the  spread  of  the  Gospel.  Now,  it  was  also  ex- 
pedient that  the  existing  Scriptures  should  be  in  the  universal 
tongue  of  the  civilized  world.  We  can  see  how  the  teachers 
of  the  New  Covenant  availed  themselves  of  this  element,  since, 
with  a  few  exceptions,  they  always  make  use  of  the  Greek  text 
of  Scripture  when  quoting  the  Old  Testament.  Hence,  the 
Providence  of  God  brought  it  about  that  in  the  Greek  there 
should  exist  a  complete  body  of  Scriptures.  God  was  less 
solicitous  about  the  Palestinian  collection,  because  that  was 
not  to  be  the  medium  of  grafting  the  new  scion  on  the  old 
stock.  Thus  the  Alexandrians  were  instruments  in  the  hands 
of  God  in  collecting  a  complete  body  of  Scriptures,  which  that 
same  Providence  has  ever  protected  as  the  great  basic  element 
in  the  deposit  of  faith.  The  first  real  canonization  of  the  deu- 
terocanonical books  was  the  approbation  of  the  Alexandrine 
collection  of  books  by  the  teachers  of  the  New  Law. 


68  THE  ALEXANDRIAN   CANON. 

We  have  hitherto  assumed  that  the  deuterocanonical  books 
were  indiscriminately  intermingled  with  the  other  books  in  the 
Alexandrine  collection.  That  we  may  not  be  thought  to 
assume  unproven  things,  we  shall  adduce  a  few  proofs  for  this 
well  warranted  fact.  In  the  first  place,  we  may  remark  that  the 
only  ones  who  would  be  likely  to  deny  this  would  be  the 
protestants.  Now  Davidson,  a  protestant,  in  his  Canon  of  the 
Bible  admits  this  as  an  obvious  fact.  "  The  very  way,"  he 
says,  "  in  which  apocryphal  (deuterocanonical)  are  inserted 
among  canonical  books  in  the  Alexandrian  Canon  shows  the 
equal  rank  assigned  to  both."  We  may  consider  a  first  proof, 
the  presence  of  these  books  in  the  Christian  Canon  of  the  first 
ages.  Now  certainly  they  received  their  collection  of  the  Old 
Testament  from  the  Greek  Canon.  Though  the  codices  whence 
they  took  their  Canon  have  perished,  yet  the  exemplars  now 
existing  were  faithfully  reproduced  from  them.  The  transla- 
tion known  as  the  Vetus  Itala,  which  dates  back  to  the  2nd 
century  of  the  Christian  era,  had  all  the  deuterocanonical  works, 
and  this  was  certainly  made  from  the  Alexandrian  collection. 
The  great  codices  of  the  Vatican  and  Mt.  Sinai,  going  back 
probably  to  the  fourth  century,  contain  these  works.  The 
Jewish  sect  of  the  Falashas,  who  have  been  in  Abyssinia  since 
before  the  coming  of  Christ  have  a  version  of  Scripture  in 
Ethiopean  in  which  no  discrimination  is  made  between  the  pro- 
tocanonical  and  deuterocanonical  works.  The  early  Fathers 
were  as  conversant  with  the  deuterocanonical  works  as  with 
the  rest  of  Holy  Scripture.  The  subjects  of  the  art  of  the 
Catacombs  are  largely  taken  from  the  deuterocanonical  works. 
Such  early  and  universal  approbation  could  not  be  effected, 
had  not  these  books  been  delivered  to  the  Messianic  church 
by  the  Old  Covenant  through  the  medium  of  the  Greek. 

It  should  not  appear  strange  that  all  our  attention  is  now 
centering  upon  the  deuterocanonical  books.  This  is  the  great 
issue  between  the  protestants  and  us.  The  protocanonical 
works  need  no  defender,  except  against  the  rationalists.  Our 
defense  against  them  will  appear  later  in  our  work.  Those 
who  reject  the  protocanonical  works  attack  the  whole  basis  of 
religious  belief.  But  those  who  reject  the  deuterocanonical 
works  profess  still  to  accept  God's  word  to  man.  With  them, 
is  the  first  issue.  We  shall  first  endeavor  to  prove  that  the 
writers  of  the  New  Law,  by  accepting  and  employing  the 
Alexandrian  text  of  Holy  Scripture,  in  which  were  the  deutero- 
canonical books,  virtually  canonized  that  collection  of  Scrip- 
tures. 


THE    CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH,  59 

Chapter  VIII. 
The  Canon  of  the  Church. 

There  is  no  trace  in  writing  or  tradition  of  any  formal  deci- 
sion rendered  by  Jesus  Christ  or  his  Apostles  concerning  the 
canon  of  the  Old  Testament.  However,  their  use  of  the  Alex- 
andrian text  of  Scripture  is  equivalent  to  an  express  decree. 
It  were  incompatible  with  the  characters  of  the  teachers  of 
mankind  and  organizers  of  the  Church,  to  make  use  of  a  collec- 
tion of  Scripture  in  which  profane  and  inspired  books  were 
commingled.  That  they  formulated  no  decree  concerning  the 
canon  of  Scripture,  proves  that  the  Scriptures  are  subordinate 
to  the  Church.  They,  in  virtue  of  the  power  given  by  the 
Master,  were  to  found  a  living  teaching  body.  The  institutions 
of  men  exist  by  force  of  the  fixed  decrees  and  constitutions 
upon  which  their  stability  is  based.  The  institution  of  Christ 
exists  by  virtue  of  the  perpetual  living  vigor  that  energizes 
within  her.  She  may  pay  small  heed  to  human  enactments, 
even  though  of  infallible  agents,  for  her  warranty  is  in  her  liv- 
ing constitution,  which  is  the  almighty  power  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  her  vital  principle.  Hence  the  Scriptures  are  only  an 
instrument  in  the  hands  of  the  Church.  Christ  and  his  Apos- 
tles founded  the  teaching  body,  which  should  guard  the  Scrip- 
tures, and  at  the  proper  time  fix  the  canon.  In  all  our  investi- 
gations concerning  the  canon,  it  is  the  authority  of  the  Church 
in  the  background  which  forms  the  great  complement  of  the 
motive  of  credibility.  No  man  can  go  securely  through  the 
dim  vista  of  those  remote  times  without  the  beacon  light  of 
the  Church.  It  is  not  by  the  sole  force  of  historical  data,  that 
I  believe  that  the  deuterocanonical  works  have  God  for  their 
author.  I  receive  them  on  the  authority  of  the  Church,  and 
then  trace  the  conformity  between  the  book's  history  and  the 
dogma  of  the  Church.  A  man  would  defeat  his  own  purpose, 
should  he  attempt  to  convert  one  to  Catholicity  by  proving 
that  the  deuterocanonical  works  had  equal  title  to  canonicity. 
Prove  first  that  there  is  a  God ;  then  that  there  is  a  Christ ; 
then  that  there  is  a  Church ;  and  lastly  exhort  him  to  humbly 
ask  Christ's  teacher  what  to  believe. 

St.  Jerome  after  much  hedging  was  forced  to  admit  that 
the  Alexandrian  collection  was  approved  by  the  Apostles.  He 
would,  indeed,  have  us  believe  that,  where  the  Septuagint  dif- 
fered from  the  Hebrew,  the  Apostles  made  use  of  the  Hebrew. 
This  is  contradicted  by  the  other  Fathers,  and  is  disproven  by 
an  examination  and  comparison  of  the  two  texts.     St.  Irenaeus' 


60  THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

authority  is  explicit  in  favor  of  our  thesis.  "  The  Apostles, 
being  older  than  all  these,  (Aquila  and  the  other  Greek  inter- 
preters) are  in  accord  with  the  aforesaid  (Septuagint)  transla- 
tion, and  the  translation  corresponds  with  the  tradition  of  the 
Apostles.  For  Peter  and  John  and  Matthew  and  Paul  and  ihe 
others  and  their  followers  announced  the  prophetic  things  ac- 
cording to  the  Septuagint.''  [Contra  Haer.  Ill,  21,  3].  Origen 
testifies  that  Paul,  in  Epist.  to  Romans,  follows  the  Septuagint 
in  everything,  except,  perchance,  things  of  minor  moment. 
[Orig.  in  Rom.  VIII,  6].  The  Syrian  Jacobites,  by  the  testi- 
mony of  their  primate  Barhebraeus  preferred  the  Syrian  version 
of  Scripture  that  that  had  been  made  from  the  Septuagint  to 
the  earlier  one  made  from  the  Hebrew,  because  the  one  made 
from  the  Septuagint  was  more  in  consonance  with  the  dis- 
courses of  Our  Lord  and  his  Apostles. 

From  the  sixteenth  century  down,  critical  collation  has  been 
made  of  the  passages  of  the  Old  Testament,  quoted  in  the 
New.  From  the  labors  of  Serarius,  Morini,  Capelli,  Kautzsch, 
and  others,  it  results  that,  of  three  hundred  and  fifty  passages 
of  the  Old  Testament  quoted  in  the  New,  more  than  three 
hundred  so  agree  with  the  Septuagint  that  it  is  evident  that 
the  writer  was  using  that  text  as  a  source.  Sts.  Peter,  James, 
Mark,  Luke,  and  the  writer  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 
always  quote  from  the  Septuagint ;  St.  Paul,  almost  always; 
and  Sts.  Matthew  and  John  very  often  quote  from  it.  The 
reason  for  such  course  of  action  is  evident.  They  were  to  con- 
vert a  Greek  world.  By  the  Providence  of  God,  a  version  of 
Scripture  existed  in  Greek.  They  were  but  following  out  the 
great  plan  of  Salvation,  by  employing  the  resources  of  this 
existing  text  of  Scripture  in  the  evangelization  of  the  world. 
Had  such  text  been  interspersed  with  spurious  books  and  frag- 
ments, such  line  of  action  would  ill  fit  the  teachers  of  the 
world.  Our  adversaries  endeavor  to  enfeeble  the  force  of  this 
argument  by  alleging  that  no  deuterocanonical  books  of  the 
Old  Testament  is  expressly  quoted  in  the  New.  This  fact  we 
admit ;  but  we  deny  that  it  weakens  our  position.  Davidson, 
in  Canon  of  the  Bible,  though  not  in  the  least  friendly  to 
Catholic  opinions  rejects  this  argument  against  the  deutero- 
canonical books.  On  page  yy :  "  When  Bishop  Cosius  says 
that  in  all  the  New  Testament  we  find  no  passage  of  the  apo- 
cryphal (deuterocanonical)  books  to  have  been  alleged  either 
by  Christ  or  his  Apostles  for  the  confirmation  of  his  doctrine, 
the  argument,  though  based  on  a  fact,  is  scarcely  conclusive ; 
else,  Esther,  Canticles,  and  other  works  might  be  equally  dis- 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   CHURCH. 


61 


credited."  In  the  New  Testament  Abdias,  Nahum,  the  Can- 
ticle of  Canticles,  Ecclesiastes,  Esther,  Ezra,  and  Nehemias  are 
neither  quoted  from  nor  alluded  to.  It  needs  not  an  explicit 
quotation  to  approve  a  book.  The  approbation  of  the  version 
which  recognized  these  books  was  a  sufficient  warranty  for  their 
inspiration.  Express  quotations  in  the  New  Testament  are 
generally  taken  from  the  Law  or  the  Prophets  ;  the  other  books 
are  more  oft  implicitly  cited,  and  it  is  only  by  the  general  simi- 
larity between  the  passages  that  we  may  detect  that  the  writer 
of  the  New  Testament  had  in  mind  any  particular  book  of  the 
Old  Testament.  Now  there  are  many  passages  in  the  New 
Testament,  which,  when  closely  examined,  bear  evidence  that 
the  writer  had  in  mind  some  book  of  the  deuterocanonical  col- 
lection. As  this  identity  of  thought  appears  to  better  advan- 
tage from  the  Greek,  we  collate  a  few  texts  in  that  tongue.* 

^o^ia  "Eeipax  fC€(f).  E.  11.  laK(oj3ov  'FimaroX'^  K€(f>.    A. 

Tlvov  Ta')(y<i  iv  a/cpodaei  aov,     19. — eaTco     Se    7ra?     av6p(07ro<; 


KoX     iv     fjuaKpodvfMia    (pOeyyov 

aTTOKpiCLV. 

Ecclesiasticus  V.  ii. 

Esto  velox  in  auscultatione  tua, 
et  in  longanimitate  prefer  respon- 
sum. 

1>o<f)La  ^eupa'x^  /ce<^.KH.    2. 
A(/>e9  a^iKrjfia  rat  irXr^aiov  aov, 
KoX  t6t€  SerjdevTO'i  crov  at  afiap- 
Tiai  (Tov  XvOrjcrovraL. 

Eccli.  XXVIII.  2. 

Remitte  injuriam  proximo  tuo, 
et  tunc  deprecanti  tibi  peccata 
solventur. 

^o(f)ia  'EaXcofjLoov  Kecf).  T.  5,  6. 

Kat  oXiya,  Traihevdevre'^  fxeyd- 
\a  evepyerrjOijaovrat  on  6  @eo? 
eireCpaaev  avTOv<i  koL  etpev  a^Cov; 
eavTov,  0)9  ^(^pvcrov  iv  ^oovevTTjpiq) 
iSoKifiacrev  avTOv<i  kol  o)?  oXokci- 


ra^u?  et9  to  aKovaai,  ^paSis  ii9 
TO  XaXrjcraL,  ^pa8v<;  itf  opyqv. 

Jas.  I.  19. 

Sit  omnis  homo  velox  ad  audi- 
endum,  tardus  ad  loquendum, 
tardus  ad  iram. 

'Eva7.    Kara  MaO.    VI.    14. 

'Eai*  yap  acfyiJTe  rol<;  avdpco- 
TTOt?  ra  TrapaTTTrnfiara  avrcov, 
CKprfcreL  koL  vfilv  6  Trarrjp  vfiwv 
6  ovpdvLO^. 

Math.  VI.  14. 

Nam  si  dimiseritis  hominibus 
delicta  sua,  dimittet  et  vobis  pater 
vester  coelestis, 

Jlerpov  A.  /ce^.    A.  6 — 7. 

'Et*  CO  ayaXXidade  oXCyov  dpri 
el  Seov  XviTT}  devre^  iv  iroiKiXoi<i 
TreipacTfiol^,  Xva  to  SoKifiiov  vfiMv 
tt)?  7ricrT€co<;  ttoXv  reifXLcoTepov 
'y^pocrov     rod    diroXXv/Mevov    Sia 


pTTcofia  Overtax  irpoaehe^aro  av-     ttu/jo?   Se  SoKifia^ofievov   evpedy 
T0v<;.  et9  eiratvov  kuI  So^av  /cat  reifirjv 

iv  awoKaXvy^et  Jrjaov   ^picrov. 

*  The  parallelism  would  be  scarcely  traceable  in  English. 


62  THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 

Wisdom  III.  5-6.  I  Pet.  I.  6—7. 

Et  in  paucis  vexati,  in  multis  In  quo  exultatis,  nunc  ad  breve 

bene     disponentur.        Quoniam  tempus   afflicti   variis  tentation- 

Deus  tentavit  eos,  et  invenit  eos  ibus,  si  opus  sit:  ut  probatiofidei 

dignos  se.     Tamquam  aurum  in  vestrse     multo     pretiosior    auro 

fornace  probavit  eos;  quasi  holo-  quod    perditur,    et    tamen     per 

caustri  hostiam  accepit  illos.          ^  ig^em  probatur,  reperiatur  in  lau- 

dem  et  gloriam   et  honorem   in 
revelatione  Jesu  Christi. 

Ke</).  Z'.  26.  Upo9  'E/3paLo<i  K€(f>.  A.  3. 

'Airavyaafia  ydp  iari  <f>coTO^  '^^  ^"^  airavyaafia  tt)?  B6^v^ 

ai8{ov  Kal  'ecTonrrpov  aKrjXihcorov  ""-}  X^P^'^'^VP   ri}^    viroardaeco^ 

T?7?  Tov  v)€ov  evepyeiwi  kul  clkcov  ' 
7779  ayaOoTTjTO';  airrov. 

Ibidem  VII.  26.  Epist.  ad  Hebraeos  I.  3. 

Etenim    lucis  seternse     splen-         Qui  quum  sit  splendor  gloriae 
dor  est,  atque  speculum  virtutis     et    impressa    imago    substantiae 
Dei  nulla  macula  aspersum,  ejus-     illius,  etc. 
que  imago  bonitatis. 

Many  more  texts  of  this  character  may  be  collected  from  a 
comparison  of  the  deuterocanonical  books  with  the  New  Testa- 
ment. See  Huet,  Demonst.  Evang.  Prop.  IV.  and  Vincenzi, 
Sessio    IV.  Cone.  Trid.  Vindicata. 

The  Fathers  of  the  Church  continued  the  approbation  of 
the  Apostles,  and  made  no  distinction  in  their  frequent  cita- 
tions from  Scripture  between  protocanonical  and  deutero- 
canonical  works.  None  of  the  Apostolical  Fathers  has  drawn 
up  a  Canon  of  Scripture.  The  injury  of  time  has  robbed  us  of 
much  of  their  writings,  but,  in  the  few  preserved  to  us,  most 
frequent  passages  are  found  from  the  deuterocanonical  works, 
of  such  mode  of  quotation  that  it  is  evident  that  they  recog- 
nized these  books  as  divine  Scripture.  St.  Clement  of  Rome, 
who  holds  a  high  place  in  the  primitive  church,  in  his  Epist.  to 
the  Corinthians,  employs  the  book  of  Wisdom  and  Ecclesiasti- 
cus.  He  made  an  analysis  of  the  book  of  Judith  and  the  Greek 
version  of  Esther  with  its  deuterocanonical  fragments.* 

His  use  of  the  deuterocanonical  books,  may  be  seen  from  a 
comparison  of  the  following  collated  passages  : 

*St.  Clement  of  Rome,  was  a  disciple  of  St.  Peter,  from  whom,  accord- 
ing to  Tertullian,  he  received  ordination.  He  succeeded  Anacletus  in  the 
Roman  See  in  the  year  91  of  the  Christian  era.  He  is  mentioned  by  St. 
Paul  in  the  Epist.  to  the  Philippians.  His  death  is  placed  about  the  year 
100.  Although  some  have  controverted  his  martyrdom,  he  is  placed  among 
the  martyrs  in  the  Canon  of  the  Mass. 


THE   CANON   OF    THE   CHURCH. 


63 


Sap.  IV.  24. 

'*  Invidia  autem  diaboli  mors 
introivit  in  orbem  terrarum." 


Sap.  XI.  22. 

"  Virtuti  brachii  tui  quis  re- 
sistet  ?" 

Sap.  XII.  12. 

"  Quis  enim  dicet  tibi :  Quid 
fecisti  ?" 

Judith  VIII.  30,  et  seqq. 


Esther  V.  XIV.  XV. 


Clem.  I.  ad  Cor.  III. 

"  Sed  secundum  pravas  ipsius 
concupiscentias  incedit,  iniquam 
et  impiam  invidiam  resumendo 
per  quam  et  mors  in  mundum 
intravit." 

Clem.  I.  Cor.  XXVII. 

"Quis  resistet  virtuti  fortitu- 
dinis  ejus  ?" 

Ibid. 

"Quis  dicet  ei :  Quid  fecisti  ?" 

Clem.  I.  Cor.  LV 

"  Beata  Judith,  cum  urbs  obsi- 
deretur,  rogavit  seniores  ut  sibi 
liceret  in  alienigenarum  castra 
transire,  ac  seipsam  periculo 
tradens  propter  caritatem  patriae 
populique  obsessi  egressa  est ;  el 
Dominus  tradidit  Olophernem  in 
manu  feminae. 

Nee  minus  perfecta  secundum 
fidem  Esther  periculo  se  objecit." 


Among  the  genuine  works  of  Clement  of  Rome,  are  rightly 
reckoned  the  two  Epistles  ad  Virgines.* 


Ecclesiasticus  V.  14. 

"  Si  est  tibi  intellectus,  re- 
sponde  proximo  ;  sin  autem,  sit 
manus  tua  super  os  tuum." 

Ecclesiasticus  IX.  8. 

"  Averte  faciem  tuam  a  muliere 
compta,  et  ne  circumspicias 
speciem  alienam.  Propter  speciem 
mulieris  multi  perierunt,  et  ex 
hoc  concupiscentia  quasi  ignis 
exardescit." 

Ibid.  12. 

"  Cum  aliena  muliere  ne  sedeas 
omnino,  nee  accumbas  cum  ea, 
super  cubitum." 


Clem.  I.  ad  Virg.  XI. 

"  Si  est  tibi  intellectus,  re- 
sponde  proximo  ;  sin  autem,  sit 
manus  tua  super  os  tuum." 

Clem.  II.  ad  Virg.  XIII. 

"  Ne  circumspicias  speciem 
alienam.  Propter  speciem  muli- 
eris multi  perierunt." 


Clem.  Ibid. 

"Cum  muliere  aliena  ne  sedeas 
omnino." 


*Funk  in  his  Patr.  Apost.  rejects  the  genuinity  of  these  two  Epistles,  but 
his  chief  argument  is  that  in  them  the  texts  from  Scripture  are  more  literally 
quoted  than  in  the  Epist.  ad  Corinthios.  Beelen  and  others  have  defended  the 
authenticity  of  these  Epistles,  and  we  see  no  reason  why  a  sane  criticism 
should  reject  them.  They  have  come  down  to  us  through  the  Syriac,  and 
have  been  translated  into  Latin  by  "Wetstein,  and  later  by  Villecourt. 


64 


THE   CANON   OF  THE  CHURCH. 


Ibid.  IX.  4. 

'*  Cum  saltatrice  ne  assiduus  sis, 
nee  audias  illam,  ne  forte  pereas 
in  efficacia  illius." 

Dan.  XIII.  8. 

"  Et  videbant  earn  senes  quo- 
tidie  ingredientem,  et  deambu- 
lantem  :  et  exarserunt  in  concu- 
piscentiam  ejus." 

Ibid.  42 — 44. 

"  Exclamavit  autem  voce  mag- 
na Susanna,  et  dixit :  Deus 
aeterne,  qui  absconditorum  es 
cognitor,  qui  nosti  omnia  ante- 
quam  fiant,  tu  scis  quoniam  fal- 
sum  testimonium  tulerunt  contra 
me  :  et  ecce  morior,  cum  nihil 
horum  fecerim,  quae  isti  mali- 
tiose  composuerunt  adversum 
me.  Exaudivit  autem  Dominus 
vocem  ejus." 


Clement.  Ibid. 

"  Cum  saltatrice  ne  assiduus 
sis,  nee  audias  illam,  ne  pereas  in 
efficacia  illius." 

Ibid.  XIII. 

"Nonne  ex  iisdem  Scripturis 
notum  tibi  est  quid,  ad  tempora 
Susannae,  narretur  de  senibus 
illis  qui,  cum  frequenter  starent 
inter  mulieres,  contemplati  pulch- 
ritudinem  alienam,  in  concupis- 
centiae  barathrum  praecipites  de- 
derunt  sese.  Castitatis  quidem 
pretium  noverunt,  sed  ipsius 
jugum  fregerunt.  Hinc  appe- 
titui  perverse  venumdati,  in 
beatam  Susannam  conspirarunt 
ut  earn  constuprarent.  At  ilia 
turpe  ipsorum  desiderium  frus- 
trata  est,  Innocentiae  suae  testem 
invocavit  Deum,  qui  de  manibus 
impiorum  senum  earn  liberavit." 


The  document  of  the  first  century,  commonly  known  as  the 
Epistle  of  St.  Barnabas,  also  employs  the  deuterocanonical 
books.* 


Ecclesiasticus  IV.  36. 

"  Non  sit  porrecta  manus  tua 
ad  accipiendum  et  ad  dandum 
collecta." 


Epist.  S.  Barnabae  XIX.  19. 

"  Noli  porrigere  manus  tuas  ad 
accipiendum,  ad  dandum  vero 
contrahere." 


The  Pastor  of  Hermas,  a  document  that  goes  back  to  the 
1st  or  2d  century,  makes  use  of  deuterocanonical  works.  It  is 
impossible  to  fix  the  identity  of  the  author  of  Pastor.  Some 
believed  him  to  be  the  Hermas  mentioned  by  Paul  to  the 
Romans  XVI.  14 :  "  Salute  Asyncritus,  Phlegon,  Hermas", 
hence  the  book  was  regarded  by  some  as  canonical  Scripture. 
It  is  conjoined  to  the  other  Scriptures  in  Codex  {»5  of  Mt. 
Sinai.     Irenseus,  Clement  of  Alexandria,  and   Origen  reputed 

*St.  Barnabas  was  a  Cyprian  Jew  of  the  tribe  of  Levi.  Having  embraced 
Christianity,  he  was  associated  with  Paul  in  the  Evangelization  of  the  Gentiles. 
Tradition  places  his  death  to  have  occurred  in  Cyprus,  at  the  hands  of  the 
Jews.  Tillemont  and  others  have  rejected  the  genuinity  of  this  Epistle.  It 
is  not  our  intention  here  to  defend  such  genuinity.  It  is  of  value  to  us  in 
making  known  to  us  the  use  of  Scripture  of  the  1st  Century. 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH.  65 

it  divine  Scripture.  It  was  declared  apocryphal  in  the  Canon 
of  Gelasius.  It  has  always  been  considered  a  treatise  valuable 
for  Christian  erudition.  Its  author's  identity  will  always  remain 
uncertain,  but  the  document  makes  for  our  scope  by  showing 
the  Christian  tradition  of  the  age  immediately  succeeding  the 
Apostolic  times.  It  is  called  the  Pastor,  because  in  it  an  angel, 
under  the  form  of  a  shepherd,  speaks.  Its  trend  is  chiefly 
parenetic. 

Ecclesiasticus  XXVIII.  3.  Pastor,  Similitudo  IX.  23. 

"  Homo  homini  reservat  iram,  "  Deus  at  Dominus  noster,  qui 

et  a  Deo  quaerit  medelam."  dominatur    omnium     rerum,    et 

creaturae  suae  universae  habet  po- 
testatem,  offensas  memmisse  non 
vult,  sed  ab  his  qui  peccata  sua 
confitentur  facile  placatur.  Homo 
vero,  cum  et  languidus,  mortalis, 
infirmus  sit  repletus  peccatis,  ho- 
mini perseveranter  irascitur." 

St.   Dionysius,   the  Areopagite,  employs  deuterocanonical 
Scripture.'* 

*Dionysius  the  Areopagite  was  a  citizen  of  Athens,  at  the  time  that  Paul 
preached  the  Gospel  of  Christ  in  that  city.  He  was  among  the  first  men  of 
the  city,  a  member  of  the  highest  judicial  court,  called  "ApeiO?  7rd<yo<;, 
Hill  of  Mars,  from  its  location  over  against  the  Acropolis,  on  the  West  side. 
Before  this  tribunal,  Paul  was  taken  to  be  judged,  for  his  doctrine,  Acts  XVII. 
By  his  preaching  in  that  assembly,  he  converted  Dionysius.  In  the  Roman 
Breviary,  the  feast  of  Dionysius  is  placed  on  the  9th  of  October,  and  he  is 
there  declared  to  have  been  sent  by  Pope  Clement  as  bishop  of  France.  The 
falsity  of  this  opinion  has  been  proven  by  the  labors  of  the  Bollaodists  and 
others.  We  find  the  first  clear,  succinct  statement  of  the  identity  of  the  Areo- 
pagite and  Bishop  Dionysius  of  Paris  in  the  work  which  the  Abbot  Hilduinus 
compiled  at  the  command  of  Louis,  the  Pious,  in  the  year  835  of  the  Christian 
era.  In  the  obscure  writings  of  Hilduinus,  we  find  it  positively  stated  that 
Dionysius,  the  Areopagite,  was  the  Bishop  of  Paris  ;  though,  at  the  same  time, 
he  mentions  the  doubts  of  those  who  refused  to  believe  this.  It  seems  that 
Hilduinus  was  a  man  of  no  critical  acumen,  and  was  deceived  into  his  error 
by  the  anonymous  Acts  of  the  Passion  of  St.  Dionysius,  published  about  the 
middle  of  the  8th  Century.  Th©  BoUandists  have  clearly  proven  that  all  the 
Founts  of  Hilduinus  were  spurious.  It  is  certain,  then,  that  the  opinion  of  the 
identity  of  the  Areopagite  and  the  Bishop  of  Paris  was  unknown  before  the 
middle  of  the  eighth  century,  and  that  it  had  then  no  good  foundation.  It 
results  from  the  voluminous  testimonials  adduced  by  the  BoUandists  that 
from  the  earliest  times,  the  Greeks  recognized  that  the  Bishop  of  Paris  and  the 
Areopagite  were  different  persons,  and  such  opinion  seems  to  have  obtained 
with  the  Latins  prior  to  the  eighth  century.  One  positive  proof  that  Dio- 
nysius did  not  become  the  Bishop  of  Paris  is  in  a  canon  of  the  Synod  of 
Sardis,  held  in  the  year  347,  which  aflirms  as  follows  :  "  Niullus  in  hac  re  in- 
ventus est  episcopus  qui  de  majori  civitate  ad  minorem  transiret."  This 
plainly  establishes  that,  up  to  the  year  347,  no  bishop  had  ever  been  trans- 
E 


66  THE   CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

The  works,  De  Coelesti  Hierarchia,  De  Ecclesiastica  Hier- 
archia,  De  Divinis  Nominibus,  De  Mystica  Theologia,  and  some 
Epistles,  are  believed  to  be  of  his  authorship.  The  Bollandists 
maintain  as  the  more  probable  opinion  that  these  works  are 
not  the  genuine  productions  of  the  Areopagite.  Their  value 
as  patristic  testimonies  is  independent  of  his  authorship,  since 
certainly  they  reflect  the  tradition  of  the  first  ages  of  the 
Church. 

Sap.  VIII.  2.  De  Div.  Nom.  IV.  12. 

"  Hanc  araavi,  et    exquisivi  a  "  Et   in   iis    quae    aditum    ad 

juventute  mea,  et  quaesivi  spon-  Scripturam  prseparant  quemdam 
sam  mihi  earn  assumere,  et  ama-  invenies  de  divinia  Sapientia 
tor  f actus  sum  formcB  illius."  ajentem  :      Amator  f  actus    sum 

fortncE  illiusy 

Sap.  VIII.  I.  De  Div.  Nom.  VII.  4. 

'' Attingtt  ergo  a  fine  usque  ad  "Et  quia  (Deus)  per  omnia 
finem  fortiter,  et  disponit  omnia  meat  pervadens,  ut  ait  Scriptura, 
suaviter."  usque  ad  finem  omnium." 

In  the  Epistle  of  St.  Dionysius  to  Demophilo  Monacho,  it 
is  evident  that  he  alludes  to  the  angel  in  Tobias,  when  he 
speaks  in  the  first  chapter  of  the  "  beneficis  angelis  de  quibus 
theologia  quaedam  tradit." 

St.  Polycarp,  the  martyr  bishop  of  Smyrna,  in  his  Epistle 
to  the  Philippians  incorporates  a  clear  quotation  from  Tobias. 

Polycarp  Epist.  ad  Philippen- 

Tobias  XII.  9.  sesX. 

"Quoniam  eleemosyna  a   morte         "  Cum  potestis  benefacere,  no- 
liberat,    et   ipsa   est  quae  purgat      lite   differre,    quia  eleemosyna  a 
peccata,  et  facit  in  venire  miseri-      morte  liber  at." 
cordiam  et  vitam  asternam." 

As  Polycarp  was  a  disciple  of  St.  John  the  Evangelist,  his 
use  of  Scripture  must  have  been  acquired  under  the  super- 
vision of  St.  John  himself.  This  isolated  quotation  impHes  a 
liberal  knowledge  of  Scripture,  for  the  Fathers  quoted  from 
memory ;  such  cognizance  of  Tobias  could  scarce  result  from 

ferred  from  a  greater  to  a  less  see.  Therefore,  Dionysius  was  not  transferred 
from  Athens  to  the  Paris  of  that  time,  which  was  so  small  as  to  be  called  by 
Julian  the  Apostate  'Ko\i')(y't)^"oppidum"  and  by  his  historian  AmmoniusMar- 
cellinus  "  Cos^eKttm  PaHsiorum."  Finally,  the  identity  is  clearly  disproven 
by  the  fact  that  Dionysius,  the  bishop  of  Paris,  came  with  Rusticus  and 
Eleutherius  to  Paris,  in  the  reign  of  Decius,  about  the  year  250  A.  D.,  as  is 
clearly  proven  by  the  Bollandists.  This  is  centuries  after  the  period  of  Dio- 
nysius, the  contemporary  of  St.  Paxil.  We  conclude,  therefore,  that  the  distinc- 
tion between  these  two  persons  is  a  clearly  proven  fact. 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH.  67 

cursory  readings.  It  must  have  resulted  from  assiduous  study 
and  use  of  a  collection  that  recognized  the  book  of  Tobias  as 
divine  Scripture.  Polycarp  certainly  reflects  the  teaching  of 
his  master,  and  we  have  here  the  implicit  approbation  of  St. 
John  the  Evangelist.*  These  are  but  scanty  data,  it  is  true, 
but  the  Apostolic  age  was  more  the  age  of  oral  teaching  than 
of  writing.  By  the  vicissitudes  of  time,  much  of  the  literary 
product  of  that  age  has  perished,  and  more  is  hid  in  obscurity. 
As  when  looking  upon  objects  from  afar,  many  are  but  dimly 
discernible,  while  the  others  are  lost  to  the  limited  sense  of 
vision ;  so  in  looking  back  through  the  long,  dim  vista  to  the 
remote  age  of  Apostolic  times,  we  see  but  little  with  satisfying 
distinctness  ;  other  things  appear  bedimmed  and  shrouded  by 
the  haze  of  time,  while  many  other  things  are  entirely  lost  to 
our  intellectual  perception.  As  we  recede  from  the  remotest 
object  of  our  vision,  and  concentrate  our  gaze  upon  nearer 
and  nearer  data,  the  fulness  and  distinctness  grows  with  equal 
pace ;  and  we  must  then  take  thought  not  to  obtain  testi- 
monies, but  to  select  the  more  fitting  from  the  available  many. 

The  few  cited  should  evince  to  an  honest  mind  that  those, 
who  succeeded  the  founders  of  the  everlasting  teaching 
organism,  recognized  and  used  the  deuterocanonical  Scriptures 
in  the  same  manner  as  the  protocanonical  ones.  We  shall 
now  pass  down  through  the  ages,  and  adduce  some  represent- 
ative testimonies  of  every  age. 

Athenagoras,  a  Greek  writer  who  presented  the  famous 
Legatio  pro  Christianis  to  Marc  Aurelius  and  Commodus, 
A.  D.  177,  quotes  Baruch  in  that  work. 

Athenag,  Legatio  pro  Christia- 
Baruch  III.  36.  nis,  (secundum  Gesner,  10). 

"  Hie  est  Deus  noster  ;  neque  "  Dominus  Deus  noster  :     non 

est  alius  qui  cum  ipso  compare-      comparabitur  alius  ad  ilium.'" 
tur." 

*0f  the  early  history  of  Polycarp,  we  know  nothing.  His  disciple,  St. 
Irenseus,  testifies  that  he  was  taught  by  the  Apostles,  and  lived  in  close 
fellowship  with  many  who  had  seen  the  Lord.  [Adv.  Haer.  III.  3.]  He  also 
testifies  that  he  was  constituted  bishop  of  Smyrna,  and  that  he  finished  his 
life  by  martyrdom  at  a  very  advanced  age.  He  is  celebrated  for  his  strict 
adhesion  to  the  true  doctrine,  and  his  corresponding  aversion  to  heresy.  It 
is  Polycarp  who  relates  that  John,  his  teacher,  at  one  time,  ran  from  the  bath, 
wherein  was  Cerinthus,  crying :  "  Let  us  flee,  lest  the  bath  should  fall  in,  as 
long  as  Cerinthus,  that  enemy  of  truth,  is  within." 

The  same  Polycarp,  once  meeting  Marcion,  who  said  :  "  Dost  thou  know 
us?"  replied:  "I  recognize  the  first  born  of  Satan,"  They  stabbed  him 
with  a  sword,  after  a  futile  attempt  to  burn  him  at  the  stake. 


68 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


St.  Hippolyte  wrote  commentaries  on  the  deuterocanonical 
fragments  of  Daniel,  and,  in  his  exegetical  treatises,  makes 
frequent  use  of  the  deuterocanonical  works.'*' 


I.  Maccab.  II.  33 — 38. 

"  Exite  et  facite  secundum  ver- 
bum  regis  Antiochi  et  vivetis.  Et 
dixerunt:  '  Non  exibimus,  neque 

faciemus  verbum  regis di- 

centes:  Moriamur  omnes  in  sim- 
plicitate  nostra '  ....  et  mortui 
sunt  usque  ad  mille  animas  homi- 
num." 

Tob.  III.  24. 

"  In  illo  tempore  exauditae  sunt 
preces  amborum  in  conspectu 
glorise  Summi  Dei,  et  missus  est 
Angelus  ut  curaret  eos  ambos, 
quorum  uno  tempore  sunt  oratio- 
nes  in  conspectu  Domini  reci- 
tatae." 


II.  Maccab.  VI.  7. 

"  Ad  agitandum  colendumque 
Bacchanaliorum  solenne  coge- 
bantur    Judaei    hedera    redimiti 


S.  Hip.  Frag,  in  Dan.  XXXI. 
XXXII. 

"Exite  et  facite  praeceptum 
regis  et  vivetis.  Illi  autem  dixe- 
runt :  '  Neque  exibimus,  neque 
faciemus  praeceptum  regis  :  mo- 
riemur  in  simplicitate  nostra  :  *  et 
interfecit  ex  eis  mille  animas 
hominum." 


S.  Hip.  In  Susannam  V.  55. 

"  Porro  ostendit,  quo  tempore 
Susanna  ad  Deum  oravit,  fuitque 
exaudita,  missum  ei  fuisse  ange- 
lum  qui  eum  adjuvaret  baud  secus 
ac  se  res  in  Tobia  et  Sarra  ha- 
buit ;  ambobus  enim  eadem  die 
eademque  hora  orantibus,  exau- 
dita est  amborum  oratio,  missus- 
que  est  angelus  Raphael  qui  eos 
sanaret." 

S.  Hip.  De  Christo  et  Anti- 
Christo  XLIX. 

"  Nam  et  ille  decretum  tulit 
. . .  cunctis  immolaturos  atque 
hedera  coronatos  Baccho  circui- 


*From  the  testimony  of  Photius,  we  know  that  St.  Hippolyte  was  the 
disciple  of  Irenaeus,  who  died  about  the  year  202,  A.  D.  The  common 
opinion  of  the  old  writers  makes  him  a  bishop,  but  there  is  a  great  difference 
of  opinion  concerning  his  see.  Eusebius  and  Jerome  confess  that  they  can 
establish  nothing  certain  concerning  it.  Anastasius,  Rom,  Ecclesise  apocrisi- 
arius,  Georgius  Syncellus,  Zonaras,  Nicephorus  Callisti,  and  the  author  of 
The  Paschal  Chronicle  make  him  bishop  of  Porto  in  Italy,  one  of  the 
suburban  bishops  of  Rome.  He  is  also  commonly  designated  in  the  works 
of  Greek  and  Latin  writers  as  a  "Roman  bishop,"  which  is  confirmatory  of 
the  preceding  testimonies.  The  greatest  diversity  of  opinion  exists  among 
modern  writers  concerning  his  see.  The  Bollandists  [Aug.  Tom.  FV.,  p.  510] 
conjecture  that  he  was  a  bishop  of  Arabiae,  who  was  martyred  at  Porto  on 
his  way  to  Rome ;  that  thus  gradually  the  error  arose  to  confound  the 
unknown  bishop  with  the  See  of  Porto,  where  he  was  martyred.  His  see  is 
uncertain,  but  his  martyrdom  may  safely  be  placed  under  Alexander 
Severus,  222-235.  His  authorship  of  the  Commentaries  and  other  works 
from  which  we  shall  quote  is  undoubted. 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


69 


Baccho  pompam  ducere.  Quod 
si  qui  minus  in  Grgecorum  ritus 
ac  mores  transire  voluissent  inter- 
ficerentur." 


Sap,  II.  12  —20. 

"  Circumveniamus  igitur  jus- 
tum,  quoniam  inutilis  est  nobis, 
et  contrarius  est  operibus  nostris, 
et  improperat  nobis  peccata  legis, 
et  diffamat  in  nos  peccata  dis- 
ciplinse  nostrse.  Promittit  se 
scientiam  Dei  habere,  et  filium 
Dei  se  nominat.  Factus  est  nobis 
in  traductionem  cogitationum 
nostrarum.  Gravis  est  nobis 
etiam  advidendum,  quoniam  dis- 
similis  est  aliis  vita  illius,  et  im- 
mutatae  sunt  viae  ejus.  Tamquam 
nugaces  aestimati  sumus  ab  illo, 
et  abstinet  se  a  viis  nostris  tam- 
quam ab  immunditiis  ;  et  praefert 
novissima  justorum,  et  gloriatur 
patrem  se  habere  Deum.  Videa- 
mus  ergo  si  sermonis  illius  veri 
sint,et  tentemus  quae  ventura  sunt 
illi,  et  sciemus  quae  erunt  novis- 
sima illius.  Si  enim  est  verus 
filius  Dei,  suscipiet  ilium,  et  libe- 
rabit  eum  de  manibus  contrario- 
rum.  Contumelia  et  tormento 
interrogemus  eum,  ut  sciamus 
reverentiam  ejus,  et  probemus 
patientiam  illius.  Morte  turpis- 
sima  condemnemus  eum :  erit 
enim  ei  respectus  ex  sermonibus 
illius." 


Sap.  V.  I. 

"  Tunc  stabunt  justi  in  magna 
constantia  adversus   eos   qui   se 


turos.  Qui  nolint  parere,  hos 
cruciatibus  atque  tormentis  ex- 
agitatos  neci  tradendos  esse.  Ac 
si  quis  haec  sigillatim  legere  velit 
singulaque  lustrare,  in  libro 
Machabaeorum  praescripta  inve- 
niet." 

S,  Hip.  Adv.  Judaeos,  IX. 

"  Producam  in  medio  etiam 
prophetiam  Salomonis  de  Christo, 
quae  aperto  et  perspicue  quae  Ju- 
daeos spectant  edisserit.  Ait 
enim  Propheta  :  Non  recte  cogi- 
taveruntimpii  deChristo,dicentes : 
Circumvenianus  justum,  quoniam 
inutilis  est  nobis  et  contrarius  est 
operibus  et  sermonibus  nostris,  et 
improperat  nobis  peccata  legis  ; 
et  promittit  se  scientiam  Dei 
habere,  et  Filium  Dei  se  nominat. 
Postea  dicit :  Gravis  est  nobis 
etiam  ad  videndum,  quoniam  dis- 
similis  est  aliis  vita  illius,  et  im- 
mutatae  sunt  viae  ejus.  Tamquam 
nugaces  aestimati  sumus  ab  illo 
et  abstinet,  se  a  viis  nostris  tam- 
quam ab  immunditiis,  et  praefert 
novissima  justorum Ait  igi- 
tur iterum  Salomon  in  persona 
Judaeorum  de  hoc  justo  qui  est 
Christus :  Factus  est  nobis  in 
traductionem  cogitationum  nost- 
rarum, et  gloriatur  Patrem  se  ha- 
bere Deum.  Videamus  ergo  si 
sermones  illius  veri  sint,  et  tente- 
mus quae  erunt  novissima  illius. 
Si  enim  est  Justus  Dei  filius,  sus- 
cipiet ilium,  liberabit  ilium  de 
manibus  contrariorum.  Morte 
turpissima  condemnemus  eum  : 
erit  enim  respectus  ejus  ex  ser- 
monibus illius." 

S.  Hip.  Adv.  Judaeos,   X. 

"Et  iterum  Solomon  de  Christo 
et  Judaeis  dicit  quod,quando  sta- 


70 


THE  CANON  OF  THE   CHURCH. 


angustiaverunt  et  qui  abstulerunt 
labores  eorum.  Videntes  turba- 
buntur  timore  horribili,  et  mira- 
buntur  in  subitatione  insperatae 
salutis,  dicentes  intra  se,  poenitu- 
dine  affecti  et  prae  augustia  spi- 
ritus  gementus  :  Hi  sunt  quos 
habuimus  aliquando  in  derisum 
et  in  similitudinem  improperii. 
Nos  insensati  vitam  illorum  aesti- 
mabamus  insaniam  et  finem  illo- 
rum sine  honore  :  ecce  quomodo 
computati  sunt  inter  filios  Dei, 
et  inter  sanctos  sors  illorum  est. 
Ergo  erravimus  a  via  veritatis,  et 
justitiae  lumen  non  luxit  nobis, 
et  sol  intelligentiae  non  est  ortus 
nobis.  Lassati  sumus  in  via  ini- 
quitatis  et  perditionis,  et  ambula- 
vimus  vias  difficiles,  viam  autum 
Domini  ignoravimus.  Quid  nobis 
profuit  superbia  ?  aut  divitiarum 
jactantia  quid  contulit  nobis  ? 
Transierunt  omnia  ilia  tamquam 
umbra,  et  tamquam  nuntius  per- 
currens." 

Baruch  III.  36—38. 

"  Hie  est  Deus  noster,  neque 
est  alius  qui  cum  ipso  compare- 
tur.  Hie  adinvenit  omnem  viam 
disciplinae,  et  tradidit  illam 
Jacob  puero  suo  et  Israel  dilecto 
suo.  Post  haec,  in  terris  visus 
est,  et  cum  hominibus  conversa- 
tus  est." 


bit  Justus  in  magna  constantia 
ante  faciem  eorum  qui  eum  afflix- 
erunt  et  sermones  ejus  repudia- 
runt :  Videntes  turbabuntur  ti- 
more horribili,  et  mirabuntur  in 
subitatione  insperatae  salutis,  et 
dicent  intra  se,poenitudine  affecti, 
et  prae  augustia  spiritus  gemen- 
tes :  Hie  est  quem  habuimus 
aliquando  in  derisum  et  in  sinn- 
litudinem  improperii.  Nos  in- 
sensati vitam  illius  existimaba- 
mus  insaniam  et  finem  illius  sine 
honore.  Quomodo  computatus 
est  in  filiis  Dei,  et  in  Sanctis  sors 
illius  est  ?  Ergo  erravimus  a  via 
veritatis  ;  et  justitiae  lumen  non 
luxit  nobis,  et  sol  non  ortus  est 
nobis.  Lassati  sumus  in  via  ini- 
quitatis  et  perditionis.  Ambula- 
vimus  vias  difficiles  ;  viam  autem 
Domini  ignoravimus.  Quid  nobis 
profuit  superbia  nostra  ?  Tran- 
sierunt omnia  ilia  tamquam  um- 
bra." 

S.  Hip.  Contra  Noet. 
"  Dicit  Scriptura  in  alio  loco  : 
Hie  est  Deus  ;  non  reputabitur 
alius  ad  eum  ....  Invenit  omnem 
viam  scientiae,  et  dedit  illam 
Jacob  puero  suo  et  Israel  dilecto 
suo  ....  Post  hsec  in  terra  visus 
est,  et  cum  hominibus  convcrsa- 
tus  est." 

In  the  Constitutiones  Apostolicae,  I  found  the  following 
quotations  or  equivalent  allusions :  Ecclesiasticus,  eight 
times ;  Judith,  four  times ;  Wisdom,  four  times ;  Tobias, 
once  ;  I.  Maccab.,  once. 

Old  Irenaeus,  the  stern  defender  of  the  Catholic  truth 
against  heresy,  is  a  certain  advocate  of  the  deuterocanonical 
books.* 


*St.  Irenaeus  was  a  native  of  Greece,  in  the  first  half  of  the  second  cen- 
tury of  the  Christian  era.  He  was  a  disciple  of  Polycarp,  and  was  sent  to 
Gaul  in  157  A.  D.    He  was,  at  first,  priest  of  the  church  at  Lyon,  and,  after- 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


71 


Dan.  XIV.  3—4. 

"  Porro  Daniel  adorabat  Deum 
suum.  Dixitque  ei  rex  :  quare 
non  adoras  Bel  ?  Qui  respondens 
ait  ei :  Quia  non  colo  idola  ma- 
nufacta,  sed  viventem  Deum  qui 
creavit  Coelum  et  terram,  et  habet 
potestatem  omnis  carnis." 

Ibid.   23 — 24. 

"  Et  dixit  rex  Daniel  :  Ecce 
nunc  non  potes  dicere  quia  iste 
non  sit  Deus  vivens  :  adora  ergo 
eum. 

"  Dixitque  Daniel :  Dominum 
Deum  meum  adorabo,  quia  ipse 
est  Deus  vivens  ;  iste  autem  non 
est  Deus  vivens." 

Dan.  XIII.  20. 

"  Ecce  ostia  pomarii  clausa 
sunt,  et  nemo  nos  videt," 


Dan.  XIII.  52—53- 

"  Inveterate  dierum  malorum, 
nunc  venerunt  peccata  tua  quae 
operabaris  prius  ;  judicans  judi- 
cia  injusta,innocentes  opprimens, 
et  dimittens  noxios,  dicente 
Domino  :  innocentem  et  justum 
non  interficies." 

Ibid.  56. 

"  Semen  Chanaan  et  non  Juda, 
species  decepit  te,  et  concupis- 
centia  subvertit  cor  tuum." 


Contra  Hsereses  Lib.  IV.  5. 

'*  Quem  (Deum)  et  Daniel 
Propheta,  cum  dixisset  ei  Cyrus 
rex  Persarum  :  'Quare  non  adoras 
BelV  annuntiavit  dicens  ;  quon- 
iam  non  colo  idola  manufacta, 
sed  vivum  Deum,  qui  constituit 
Coelum  et  terram,  et  habet  omnis 
carnis  dominationem.  Iterum 
dixit  :  Dominum  Deum  meum 
adorabo,  quoniam  hie  est  Deus 
vivus." 


Iren.     Contra    Hsereses    Lib. 
IV.    XXVI.  3. 

"  Qui  vero  crediti  quidem  sunt 
a  multis  esse  presbyteri,  serviunt 

autem     suis     voluptatibus et 

dicunt :  nemo  nos  videt y 

Iren.    Contra     Haereses    Lib. 
IV.  XXVI.  3. 

'*  Audient  eas  quae  sunt  a 
Daniele  Propheta  voces  :  Semen 
Chanaan  et  non  Juda,  species 
seduxit  te,  et  concupiscentia 
evertit  cor  tuum;  inveterate  dier- 
um malorum,  nunc  advenerunt 
peccata  tua  quae  faciebas  antea, 
judicans  judicia  injusta  ;  etinno- 
centes  quidem  damnabas  ;  dimit- 
tebas  vero  nocentes,  dicente 
Domino  :  Innocentem  et  justum 
non  occides." 


wards,  bishop  of  that  see.  He  made  of  that  city  the  most  flourishing  centre 
of  Catholicity  in  all  Gaul.  His  erudition  was  vast  and  precise.  He  advo- 
cated moderation  in  the  schism  of  the  Asiatic  bishops  under  Pope  Victor  I, 
The  influence  of  Papias  drew  him  into  the  error  of  the  mitigated  Millenar- 
ianism.  His  chief  work  is  his  Treatise  against  Heretics,  in  five  books.  He 
was  martyred  in  the  fifth  general  persecution  in  302.  By  the  testimony  of 
Eusebius,  he  recognized  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  and  Wisdom,  and  quoted 
from  them.  [Hist.  Eccles.  V.  36.]  We  shall  collate  a  few  passages.  In  the 
fourth  book  Contra  Hereses,  we  find  scriptural  use  of  the  deuterocanonical 
fragments  of  Daniel. 


72 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   CHURCH. 


Sap.  VI.   19 — 20. 

"  Custoditio  autera  legum  con- 
summatio  incorruptionis  est,  in- 
corruptio  autem  facit  esse  proxi- 
mum  Deo." 

Baruch  IV.  36— V. 

"  Circuraspice,  Jerusalem,  ad 
orientem  et  vide  jucunditatem  a 
Deo  tibi  venientem.  Ecce  enim 
veniunt  filii  tui  quos  dimisisti 
dispersos ;  veniunt  collecti  ab 
oriente  usque  ad  occidentem,  in 
verbo  Sancti  gaudentes  in  hon- 
orem  Dei." 

Cap.  V.  Exue  te,  Jerusalem, 
stola  luctus  et  vexationis  tuae,  et 
indue  te  decore  et  honore  ejus 
quae  a  Deo  tibi  est  sempiternae 
gloriae.  Circumdabit  te  Deus 
diploide  justitiae,  et  imponet 
mitram  capiti  honoris  aeterni. 
Deus  enim  ostendet  splendorem 
suum  in  te,  omni  qui  sub  coelo 
est.  Nominabitur  enim  tibi 
nomen  tuum  a  Deo  in  sempi- 
ternum ;  pax  justitae  et  honor 
pietatis.  Exsurge,  Jerusalem,  et 
sta  in  excelso,  et  circumspice  ad 
orientem,  et  vide  collectos  filios 
tuos  ab  oriente  sole  usque  ad  oc- 
cidentem, in  verbo  sancti  gau- 
dentes Dei  memoria.  Exierunt 
enim  abs  te  pedibus  ducti  ab  ini- 
micis  :  adducet  autem  illos  Dom- 
inus  ad  te  portatos  in  honore 
sicut  filios  regni.  Constituit  enim 
Deus  humiliare  omnem  montem 
excelsum  et  rupes  perennes  et 
convalles  replere  in  aequalitatem 
terrae  ut  ambulet  Israel  diligen- 
ter  in  honorem  Dei.  Obumbra- 
verunt  autem  et  silvae  et  omne 


Ibid.  XXXVIII.  3. 

"  Visio  autem  Dei  eflficax  in- 
corruptionis est ;  incorruptio  au- 
tem proximum  facit  esse  Deo." 

Iren.  Contra  Haereses  Lib.  V. 
XXXV.  I. 

"Hoc  significavit  Jeremias  pro- 
pheta:*  Circumspice,  dicens, 
ad  orientem,  Jerusalem,  et  vide 
laetitiam  quae  adventat  tibi  ab 
ipso  Deo.  Ecce  venient  filii  tui 
quos  emisisti,  venient  collecti  ab 
oriente  usque  ad  occidentem 
verbo  illius  sancti,  gaudentes  ea 
quae  a  Deo  tuo  est  claritate. 
Exuere,  Jerusalem,  habitum  luc- 
tus et  afflictionis  tuae,  et  induere 
decorem  ejus  quae  a  Deo  tuo  est 
claritatis  in  aeternum.  Circum- 
dare  amictum  duplicem  ejus 
quae  a  Deo  tuo  est  justitiae,  im- 
pone  mitram  super  caput  tuum 
gloriae  aeternae.  Deus  enim 
demonstrabit  ei  quae  sub  coelo 
est  universae  tuum  fulgorem. 
Vocabitur  namque  nomen  tuum 
ab  ipso  Deo  in  aeternum,  pax 
justitiae  et  gloriae  colenti  Deo. 
Surge,  Jerusalem,  et  sta  in  ex- 
celso, et  circumspice  ad  orien- 
tem, et  vide  collectos  filios  tuos  a 
solis  ortu  usque  ad  occidentem, 
verbo  illius  sancti  gaudentes,  ip- 
sam  Dei  recordationem. 

"Profecti  sunt  enim  a  te  pedites 
dum  adducerentur  ab  inimicis. 
Introducet  illos  Deus  ad  te  por- 
tatos cum  gloria  tamquam  thron- 
um  regni.  Decrevit  enim  Deus 
ut  humilietur  omnis  mons  ex- 
celsus  et  congeries  aeternae,  et 
ut  valles  impleantur  ad  redigen- 


*Baruch  was  by  many  considered  an  integral  part  of  Jeremias. 


THE   CANON  OF  THE   CHURCH. 


73 


lignum  suavitatis  Israel  ex  man- 
dato  Dei.  Adducet  enim  Deus 
Israel  cum  jucunditate  in  lumine 
majestatis  suae,  cum  misericor- 
dia  et  justitia  quae  est  ex 
ipso." 


dam  planitiem  terrae,  ut  ambulet 
Israel  tuti  Dei  gloria.  Umbra- 
cula  autem  intexuerunt  silvae,  et 
omne  lignum  boni  odoris  ipsi 
Israel,  praecepto  Dei.  Praeibit 
enim  Deus  cum  laetitia,  lumine 
claritatis  suae  cum  misericordia 
et  justitia  quae  ab  ipso  est." 


Clement   of  Alexandria   has   drawn    a   large   part    of    his 
scriptural  references  from  deuterocanonical  sources.* 


Ecclesiasticus  XXI.  7. 

"  Qui  odit  correptionem,  vesti- 
gium est  peccatoris  ;  et  qui  timet 
Deum,  converteturadcor  suum." 

Sap.  XI.  25. 

"  Nihil  odisti  eorum  quae 
fecisti  :  nee  enim  odiens  aliquid 
constituisti  aut  fecisti." 

Eccli.  XXII.  6—8. 

"  Flagella  et  doctrina  in  omni 
tempore  sapientia.  Qui  docet 
fatuum,  quasi  qui  conglutinat 
testam.  Qui  narrat  verbum  non 
audienti,  quasi  qui  excitat  dor- 
mien  tem  de  gravi  somno." 


Eccli.  XXXIV.  14—15. 

"  Spiritus  timentium  Deum 
quaeritur,  et  in  respectu  illius 
benedicetur.  Spes  enim  illorum 
in  salvantem  illos  et  oculi  Dei  in 
diligentes  se." 


Clem.  Paed.  VIII. 

"  Scripturam  perperam  intelli- 
gentes  quae  sic  dicit.  Et  qui 
timet  Dominum  convertetur  ad 
cor  suum." 

Clem.  Paed.  Ibid. 

"Nihil  enim  est  quod  odio 
habet  Dominus." 

Clem.  Ibid. 

"  Flagella  enim  et  disciplina 
in  omni  tempore  sapientia.  Qui 
testam  conglutinat,  et  stultum 
docet  ad  sensum,inquit ....  Prop- 
terea  aperte  subjunxit :  Excitans 
dormientem  e  profundo  somno, 
qui  est  ex  aliis  rebus  omnibus 
maxime  morti  similis." 

Clem.  Ibid. 

*'  Quoniam  spiritus  timens 
Dominum  vivet.  Spes  enim  est 
in  eum  qui  ipsos  salvos  facit." 


*Clement  of  Alexandria  was  a  Platonic  philosopher  of  Alexandria.  He 
was  converted  by  St.  Pantenus,  who  was  at  the  head  of  the  Alexandrian 
school  in  the  latter  half  of  the  second  century.  After  the  death  of  Pantenus, 
Clement  became  chief  of  this  famous  school  in  190,  A.  D.  Origen  was  one 
of  his  pupils.  He  died  about  the  year  217,  A.  D.  His  chief  works  are 
Cohortatio  ad  Gentes,  Psedagogus,  ^rpcofiara  or  Miscellanea,  Quis  Dives 
Salvetur,  and  Fragments.  Among  all  these,  the  Stromata  are  the  most 
famous.     Clement  is  the  great  representative  of  Alexandrian  tradition. 


74 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   CHURCH. 


Eccli.  I,  27 — 28. 

"Timor  Domini  expellit  pecca- 
tum,  nam  qui  sine  timore  est  non 
potest  justificari." 

Ibid.  22. 

Corona  sapientiae,  timor 
Domini,  replens  pacem  et  salutis 
fructum." 

Eccli.  XVI.  13. 

"  Secundum  misericordiam 
suam,  sic  correptio  illius  hom- 
inem  secundum  opera  sua  jud- 
icat." 

Ibid.  12. 

"  Misericordia  enim  et  ira  est 
cum  illo.  Potens  exoratio,  et 
effundens  iram." 


Eccli.  VII.  25—26. 

"Filii  tibi  sunt?  erudi  illos, 
et  curva  illos  a  pueritia  illorum. 
Filiae  tibi  sunt  ?  serva  corpus 
illarum,  et  non  ostendas  hilarem 
faciem  tuam  ad  illas." 

Eccli.  XXXII.  21. 

"Peccator  homo  vitabit  correp- 
tionem,  et  secundum  voluntatem 
suam  inveniet  comparationem." 

Eccli.  XVIII.  13—14;  XVI.  12. 
Baruch  IV,  4. 

"  Beati  sumus,  Israel,  quia  quae 
Deo  placent  manifesta  sunt 
nobis." 


Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  I.  VIII. 

'"'Timor  enim  Domini  pec  cat  a 
extrudit :  Qui  est  autem  sine  tim- 
ore non  poterit  justificari,  inquit 
Scriptural 

Ibid. 

"  Corona  itaque  sapientiae,  in- 
quit  Sapientia,  timor  Domini."* 

Ibid. 

"  Virum,  inquit,  secundum 
opera  sua  judicabit." 


Ibid. 

"  De  eo  quoque  aperte  dicit 
Sap.:  Misericordia  enim  et  ira 
cum  ipso.  Dominus  enim  his 
utrisque  solus  est  potens,  iram 
effundens  ad  propitiationem  ex 
magna  sua  misericordia.  Ita 
etiam  ejus  reprehensio." 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  I.  Cap.  IX. 

"  Sunt  tibi  filii  ?  Castiga  eos, 
suadet  Sapientia,  et  inflecte  eos 
a  juventute  sua.  Sunt  tibi  filiae  ? 
attende  corpori  earum,  et  ne  vul- 
tum  tuum  apud  eas  exhilara- 
veris." 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  I.  Cap.  IX. 

" —  quoniam  peccator  homo 
fugit  reprehensionem." 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  I.  Cap.  IX. 
Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  I.  X. 

"  Jam  quoque  per  Jeremiam 
enarrat  prudentiam  :  Beati  su- 
mus, Israel,  dicens,  quod  quae 
Deo  grata  sunt,  a  nobis  cognita 
sunt." 


*  Ecclesiasticus    was    frequently     termed    by    the   Fathers,    Sapientia 
Sirach. 


THE  CANON   OF  THE   CHURCH. 


75 


Baruch  III.  9. 

*'  Audi,  Israel,  mandata  vitae  : 
auribus  percipe  ut  scias  pruden- 
tiam." 

Baruch  III.  13. 

"  Nam  si  in  via  Dei  ambulas- 
ses,  habitasses  utique  in  pace 
sempiterna." 

Eccli.  XXXIII.  6. 

"  Equus  emissarius,  sic  et  ami- 
cus subsannator,  sub  omni  su- 
prasedente  hinnit." 


Sap.  VI.  19. 

"  Cura  ergo  disciplinae  dilectio 
est,  et  dilectio  custodia  legum 
illius  est;  custoditio  autem  legum 
consummatio  incorruptionis  est." 

Sap.  XVI.  26. 

"  —  ut  scirent  filii  tui  quos 
dilexisti,  Domine,  quoniam  non 
nativitatis  fructus  pascunt  hom- 
ines, sed  sermo  tuus,  hos  qui  in 
te  crediderint  conservat." 

Eccli.XVIII.32(iuxtaGraecum) 
"  Ne  delecteris  multis  deliciis." 


Eccli.  XXXI.  36—38. 

"  Exultatio  animae  et  cordis, 
vinum  moderate  potatum. 

"  38.  Vinum  multum  potatum 
irritationem  et  iram  et  ruinas 
multas  facit." 


Eccli.  XXXI.  31. 

"  Ignis  probat  ferrum  durum  ; 
sic  vinum  corda  superborum  ar- 
guet  in  ebrietate  potatum." 


Ibid. 

"Audi,  Israel,  mandata  vitae, 
ausculta  ut  cognoscas  pruden- 
tiam." 

Ibid. 

"  Quinetiam  . .  .  per  Jeremiam 
hortatur  (psedagogus)  dicens  : 
Via  Dei  si  ambulasses,  habitasses 
in  pace  in  saeculum." 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  I.  XIII. 

"  Hinc  etiam  dicit  Sapientia  : 
Equus  ad  coitum  libidinosus,  et 
adulter  irrationali  jumento  assi- 
milatus  ret  ideo  subjungit  :  Quo- 
cumque  super  eum  sedente 
hinnit." 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  I. 

*'  Cura  autem  disciplinae  est 
caritas,  quam  dicit  Sapientia,  car- 
itas  vero  observatio  legum  est." 

Ibid. 

"  Discant,  inquit,  filii  tui  quos 
dilexisti,  Domine,  quod  non  gen- 
erationes  fructuum  nutriant  hom- 
inem,  sed  verbum  tuum  eos  qui 
tibi  credunt  conservat." 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  I. 

"  Ne  laeteris  autem  propter 
execrandas  delicias,  dicit  Sapi- 
entia." 

Ibid.  Cap.  II. 

"  Illud  ergo  bene  dictum  est : 
Exultatio  animae  et  cordis  vinum 
creatum  est  ab  initio,  si  quantum 
satis  est  bibatur." 

Ibid. 

"  Atque  ante  Tragoediam  cla- 
mavit  Sapientia  :  *  Vinum  quod 
bibitur  multum  in  irritatione  et 
omni  lapsu  replet.' " 

Clem.  Ibid. 

"  Praeclare  profecto  dictum 
est :  Fornacem  quidem  inter  tin- 
gendum  probare  ferri  aciem, 
vinum  autem  cor  superborum." 


76 


THE  CANON   OF  THE  CHURCH. 


Ibid.  30  (juxta  Grsecum). 

"  In  vino  virum  ne  te  exhibeas  : 
vinum  enim  multos  perdidit." 

Eccli.  XXVI.  II. 

"  Mulier  ebriosa  ira  magna,  et 
contumelia  et  turpitude  illius 
non  tegetur." 

Eccli.  XXXI.  23. 

"Vigilia,  cholera  et  tortura 
viro  infrunito." 

Baruch  III.  16 — 19. 

"  Ubi  sunt  principes  gentium  ? 
et  qui  dominatur  super  bestias 
quae  sunt  super  terram  ?  qui  in 
avibus  coeli  ludunt  ?  qui  argen- 
tum  thesaurizat  et  aurum  in  qua 
confidunt  homines,  et  non  est 
finis  acquisitionis  eorum  ?  qui  ar- 
gentum  fabricant  et  solliciti  sunt, 
nee  est  inventio  operum  illorum  ? 
Exterrainati  sunt,  et  ad  inferos 
descenderunt,  et  alii  loco  eorum 
surrexerunt." 


Eccli.  XXI.  23. 

"  Fatuus  in  risu  exaltat  vocem 
suam ;  vir  autem  sapiens  vix 
tacite  ridebit." 

Eccli.  XX.  5. 

"  Est  tacens  qui  invenitur  sapi- 
ens, et  est  odibilis,  qui  procax 
est  ad  loquendum." 

Ibid.  8. 

"  Qui     multis  utitur     verbis 

laedet    animam  suam ;    et    qui 

potestatem    sibi  sumit    injuste, 
odietur." 


Clem.  Ibid. 

"In  vino,  in  quit,  ne  te  virum 
fortem  praebeas  ;  multos  enim 
vinum  reddidit  inutiles." 

Ibid. 

"  Ira  autem,  inquit,  magna  est 
mulier  ebria  ....  quoniam  suam 
non  celat  turpitudinem." 

Ibid. 

"  Labor  autem  vigilise,  inquit, 
et  bilis  et  tormentum  est  cum 
homine  insatiabili." 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  11.  Cap.  III. 

"  Pulcherrime  itaque  alicubi 
dicit  dtvina  Scriptura,  ad  eos  qui 
sunt  sui  amantes  et  arrogantes 
verba  dirigens :  Ubi  sunt  qui 
gentibus  imperabant  et  qui  dom- 
inabantur  feris  quae  sunt  super 
terram  ?  qui  in  coeli  avibus  illude- 
bant :  qui  argenti  et  auri  thesau- 
ros  congregabant  in  quibus  hom- 
ines habebant  fiduciam,  et  non 
est  finis  acquisitionis  eorum  ?  qui 
aurum  et  argentum  fabricabantur 
et  erant  solliciti  ?  non  est  inven- 
tio operum  illorum.  Evanuerunt, 
et  ad  inferos  descenderunt." 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  V. 

"  Stultus  autem  in  risu  extollit 
vocem  suam,  inquit  Scriptura : 
vir  autem  astutus  vix  sensim 
subridebit." 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  VI. 

"Est  enim  tacens  qui  inveni- 
tur sapiens  ;  et  est  qui  odio  hab- 
etur  ob  multam  loquacitatem." 

Ibid. 

"  Quin  etiam  ipse  nugator  af- 
fert  sibi  ipsi  fastidium  ac  satie- 
tatem :  Qui  enim  multiplicat 
sermonem,  edit  animam  suam." 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


77 


Ibid.  XXXI.  41. 

"  In  convivio  vini  non  arguas 
proximum,  et  non  despicias  eum 
in  jucunditate  illius." 

Eccli.  XIV.  I. 

"  Beatus  vir  qui  non  est  lapsus 
verbo  ex  ore  suo,  et  non  est 
stimulatus  in  tristia  delicti." 

Eccli.  IX.  12. 

"  Cum  aliena  muliere  ne  sedeas 
omnino,  nee  accumbas  cum  ea 
super  cubitum." 

Ibid.  13. 

*'  —  et  non  alterceris  cum  ilia 
in  vino,  ne  forte  declinet  cor 
tuum  in  illam,  et  sanguine  tuo 
labaris  in  perditionem." 

Eccli.  XXXI.  19—20. 

"  Utere  quasi  homo  frugi  his 
quae  tibi  apponuntur,  ne,  cum 
manducas,  multum  odio  habearis. 
Cessa  prior  causa  disciplinae,  et 
noli  nimius  esse,  ne  forte  offen- 
das." 

Eccli.  XXXII.  15. 

"  Et  hora  surgendi  non  te 
trices  :  praecurre  autem  prior  in 
domum  tuam." 

Eccli.  XXXII.  4,  10,  II. 

"  Loquere,  major  natu  ;  decet 
enim  te.  Adolescens,  loquere  in 
causa  tua  vix.  Si  bis  interroga- 
tus  fueris,  habeat  caput  respon- 
sum  tuum." 


Eccli.  IX.  25. 

"  Terribilis  est  in  civitate  sua 
vir  linguosus." 


Ibid.  Cap.  VII. 

*'  In  convivio  autem,  inquit,  ne 
argueris  proximum,  et  ei  oppro- 
brii  sermonem  ne  dixeris." 

Ibid.  Cap.  VII. 

"  Beatus  revera  vir  ille  est  qui 
non  est  lapsus  in  ore  suo,  vel  non 
compunctus  est  in  molestia  pec- 
cati." 

Ibid. 

"  Cum  muliere  quae  viro  sub- 
jecta  est  ne  omnino  sedeas,  et 
ne  super  cubitum  cum  ea  accu- 
bueris." 

Ibid. 

"  Et  ideo  subjungit :  neque 
cum  ea  in  vino  congrediaris,  ne 
quando  inclinet  cor  tuum  in  ip- 
sam,  et  sanguine  tuo  labatur  ad 
interitum." 

Ibid. 

"Comede,  inquit,  ut  homo  quae 
apponuntur;  cessa  autem  primus 
disciplinae  gratia.  Et  si  in  medio 
plurium  sederis  ne  ante  ipsos 
manum  porrigas." 

Ibid. 

"  Cum  est,  inquit,  tempus  sur- 
gendi, ne  sis  postremus,  et  rever- 
tere  in  domum  tuam." 

Ibid. 

"  Senior,  loquere  in  convivio, 

te  enim  decet Adolescens, 

tibi  quoque  permittit  Sapientia, 
loquere  si  te  opus  sit,  vix  cum 
bis interrogatus fueris;  sermonem 
autem  tuum  paucis  in  summam 
redige." 

Ibid. 

"  Terribilis  est  in  interitu  suo 
vir  linguosus." 


78 


THE  CANON   OF  THE  CHURCH. 


Eccli.  VII.  15. 

"  Noli  verbosus  esse  in  multi- 
tudine  presbyterorum,  et  non 
iteres  verbum  in  oratione  tua." 

Eccli.  XXXVIII.  I,  2,  7. 

"  Honora  medicum  propter 
necessitatem  ;  etenim  ilium  crea- 
vit  Altissimus.  A  Deo  est  enim 
oranis  medela,  et  a  rege  accipiet 
donationem.  7.  In  his  curans 
mitigabit  dolorem,  et  unguenta- 
rius  faciet  pigmenta  suavitatis  et 
unctiones  conficiet  sanitatis." 

Eccli.  XXXIX.  17-19. 

"  In  voce  dicit  :  obaudite  me, 
divini  f ructus,  et  quasi  rosa  plan- 
tata  super  rivos  aquarura  fructi- 
ficate.  Quasi  Libanus,  odorem 
suavitatis  habete.  Florete  flores, 
quasi  lilium,  et  date  odorem,  et 
frondete  in  gratiam,  et  collaudate 
canticum,  et  benedicite  Dominum 
in  operibus  suis." 

Ibid.  31. 

"  Initium  necessari^e  rei  vitse 
hominum  :  aqua,  ignis  et  ferrum, 
sal,  lac,  et  panis  similagineus,  et 
mel  et  botrus  uvae  et  oleum  et 
vestimentum." 

Eccli.  XXIII.  6. 

"  Aufer  a  me  ventris  concupis- 
centias,  et  concubitus  concupis- 
centiae  ne  apprehendant  me,  et 
animae  irreverenti  et  infrunitae 
ne  tradas  me." 

Eccli.  XXIII.  25. 

"  Omnis  homo  qui  transgredi- 
tur  lectum  suum  contemnens  in 
animam  suam  et  dicens  :  quis  me 
videt  ?  Tenebrae  circumdant  me 
et  parietes  cooperiunt  me,  et 
nemo    circumspicit    me  ;    quem 


Ibid. 

"Ne   nugeris    in    multitudine 

seniorum Sermonemneitera- 

veris  in  oratione  tua." 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  VIII. 

"  Honora  autem  medicum 
propter  ejus  utilitatem,  inquit 
Scriptura.  Ipsum  enim  creavit 
Altissimus.  A  Domino  autem  est 
medicina.  Deinde  subjungit : 
Et  unguentarius  faciet  mistio- 
nem." 


Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  II.  Cap.VIII. 

"  Exaudite  me,  inquit,  et  tam- 
quam  rosa  plantata  in  fluentis 
aquarum  germinate ;  tamquam 
Libanus,suavem  odorem  emittite, 
et  benedicite  Dominem  super 
opera  ejus." 


Ibid. 

"  Dicit  itaque  Scriptura:  Aqua, 
et  ignis,  et  ferrum,  et  lac,  simila 
frumenti,  et  mel,  sanguis  uvae  et 
oleum  et  vestis  ;  hsec  omnia  piis 
ad  bona  sunt." 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  X. 

"  Quocirca  amove  a  servis  tuis 
spes  inanes  et  indecoras,  inquit, 
cupiditates  averte  a  me.  Ventris 
appetitio  et  coitus  ne  me  appre- 
hendant." 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  X. 

"  Homo  qui  ascendit  super 
lectum  suum,  qui  dicit  in  animo  : 
Quis  me  videt  ?  circa  me  sunt 
tenebrae,  et  parietes  sunt  tegu- 
menta  mea,  et  nemo  aspicit  pec- 
cata  mea.     Quidvereor,  ne  me- 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


79 


vereor  ?  Delictorum  meorum 
non  memorabitur  Altissimus.  28. 
— et  non  cognovit  quoniam  oculi 
Domini  multo  plus  lucidiores 
sunt  super  solem,  circumspicien- 
tes  omnes  vias  hominum,  et  pro- 
fundum  abyssi,et  hominum  corda 
intuentes  in  absconditas  partes." 

Eccli.  XVIII.  30. 

"Post  concupiscentias  tuas 
non  eas,  et  a  voluntate  tua  aver- 
tere." 

Eccli.  XIX.  2—3. 

"  Vinum  et  mulieres  apostatare 
faciunt  sapientes,  et  arguent  sen- 
satos,  et  qui  se  jungit  fornicariis 
erit  nequam  ;  putredo  et  vermes 
haereditabunt  ilium." 

Eccli.  XI.  4. 

"  In  vestitu  ne  glorieris  un- 
quam,  nee  in  die  honoris  tui  ex- 
toUaris." 

Eccli.  XXV.  8. 

"  Corona  senum  multa  peritia  ; 
et  gloria  illorum,  timer  Dei." 

Eccli.  IX.  7. 

"  Noli  circumspicere  in  vicis 
civitatis,  nee  oberraveris  in  plat- 
eis  illius." 

Eccli.  XI.  31. 

"  Non  omnem  hominem  indu- 
cas  in  domum  tuam,  multae  enim 
sunt  insidiae  dolosi." 

Eccli.  IX.  22. 

"Viri  justi  sint  tibi  convivae, 
et  in  timore  Dei  sit  tibi  gloria- 
tio." 

Eccli.  XXI.  24. 

"  Ornamentum  aureum  pru- 
denti,  doctrina,  et  quasi  brachiale 
in  brachio  dextro." 


minerit  Altissimus?....  Nescit 
enim,  Scriptura  dicit,  oculi  Do- 
mini Altissimi  quanto  sint  soli 
splendidiores  qui  respiciunt  om- 
nes vias  hominum,  et  partes  oc- 
cultas  intelligunt." 


Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  X. 

"  Post  tua  desideria  ne  ambules 
et  acearis  a  tuis  appetionibus. 
Vinum  enim  et  mulieres  faciunt 
sapientes  deficere,  et  qui  adhseret 
meretricibus  evadet  audacior. 
Putredo  et  vermis  erunt  ejus 
hseredes  et  efferetur  in  majori 
ludibrio." 


Ibid. 

"  In  amictu  vestis  ne  glorieris, 
neque  in  omni  gloria  quae  est 
praeter  leges  efferaris." 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  III.  Cap.  III. 

"  Senum  autem  corona,  inquit 

Scriptura,  est  multa  experientia." 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  III.  Cap.  IV. 

"  Ne  circumspicias  autem,  in- 
quit,  in  vicis  civitatis,  nee  erres 
in  ejus  solitudinibus." 

Ibid. 

"Unde  Scriptura  constantis- 
sime  admonet :  Ne  introducas 
quemvis  hominem  in  domum 
tuam  ;  dolosi  enim  hominis  mul- 
tae sunt  insidiae." 

Alibi  autem:  "Viri  justi,  in- 
quit,  sint  tui  convivae,  et  in  ti- 
more Domini  tua  permanebit 
gloriatio." 

Clem.  Paed.  Lib.  III.  Cap.  XI. 

"  Ut  vult  enim  Scriptura  ;  Au- 
reus prudenti  mundus  est  dis- 
ciplina." 


80 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


Eccli.  XXVI.  12. 

"  Fornicatio  mulieris  in  extol- 
lentia  oculorum,  et  in  palpebris 
illius  agnoscetur." 

Eccli.  IX.  8—9. 

"  Averte  faciem  tuam  a  muliere 
compta,  et  ne  circumspicias  spe- 
ciem  alienam.  Propter  speciem 
mulieris  multi  perierunt,  et  ex 
hoc  concupiscentia  quasi  ignis 
exardescit." 


Eccli.  I.  I. 

"  Omnis  sapientia  a  Domino 
Deo  est,  et  cum  illo  fuit  semper, 
et  est  ante  aevum." 

Sap.  I.  7. 

"  Quoniam  spiritus  Domini  re- 
plevit  orbem  terrarum." 

Sap.  VII.  17. 

"  Ipse  enim  dedit  mihi  horum 
quae  sunt  scientiam  veram,  ut 
sciam  dispositionem  orbis  ter- 
rarum,   et  virtutes  elementorum 

differentias    virgultorum   et 

virtutes  radicum,  et  qusecumque 
sunt  absconsa  et  improvisa  didici; 
omnium  enim  artifex  docuit  me 
Sapientia." 

Eccli.  XV.  10. 

"  Quoniam  a  Deo  profecta  est 
sapientia  '•  sapientise  enim  Dei 
adstabit  laus,  et  in  ore  fideli 
abundabit." 

Tob.  IV.  16. 

"  Quod  ab  alio  oderis  fieri  tibi, 
vide,  ne  tu  aliquando  alteri 
facias." 

Sap.  III.  I. 

"Justorum  autem  animae  in 
manu  Dei  sunt,  et  non  tanget 
illos  tormentum  mortis." 


Ibid. 

"  Fornicatio  autem  mulieris  in 
elevatione  oculorum." 

Ibid. 

"  Averte  autem  oculum  a  mu- 
liere gratiosa,  et  ne  discas  alie- 
nam pulchritudinem,  inquit 
Scriptura ;  et  si  causam  roges, 
ipsa  tibi  enarrabit :  In  pulchri- 
tudine  enim  mulieris  multi  se- 
ducti  sunt,  et  ex  ea  tamquam 
ignis  accenditur  amicitia." 

Clem.  Strom.  Lib.  I.  Cap.  IV. 

"  Quoniam  omnis  sapientia  a 
Domino,  et  cum  ipso  est  in  sae- 
cula,  ut  dicit  Jesu  Sapientia." 

Clem.  Strom.  Lib.  I.  Cap.  V. 
"  Quoniam  Spiritus  Domini  re- 
plevit  orbem  terrse." 

Clem.  Strom.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  II. 

"  Dicit  itaque  in  Sapientia : 
Ipse  mihi  dedit  non  falsam  eorum 
quae  sunt  cognitionem,  ut  cog- 
noscam  mundi  constitutionem 
. . . .  et  vires  radicum . . . .  et  quae- 
cumque  sunt  occulta  et  operta 
cognovi  ;  auce  est  enim  omnium 
artifex  me  docuit  Sapientia." 

Clem.  Strom.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  V. 

"  Merito  ergo  dictum  est  apud 
Salomonem :  Sapientia  est  in 
ore  fidelium." 

Ibid.  Cap.  XXIIL 

"  Hoc  breviter  Scriptura  sig- 
nificavit  dicens:  Quod  odio  habes, 
alii  ne  feceris." 

Clem.  Strom.  Lib.  IV.  Cap.  XL 

"  Justorum  enim  animae  in 
manu  Dei  sunt,  et  non  tanget  eas 
tormentum." 


THE    CANON   OF  THE   CHURCH. 


81 


Ibid. 

"  Visi  sunt  oculis  insipientium 
mori,  et  sestimata  est  afflictio  ex- 
itus  eorum  et  quod  a  nobis  est 
iter,  exterminium  ;  illi  autem  sunt 
in  pace.  Etsi  coram  hominibus 
tormenta  passi  sunt,  spes  illorum 
immortalitate  plena  est.  In  pau- 
cis  vexati,  in  multis  bene  dispon- 
entur,  quoniam  Deus  tentavit 
eos,  et  invenit  illos  dignos  se. 
Tamquam  aurum  in  fornace  pro- 
bavit  illos,  et  quasi  holocausti 
hostiam  accepit  illos,  et  in  tem- 
pore erit  respectus  illorum.  Ful- 
gebunt  justi,  et  tamquam  scin- 
tillse  in  arundineto  discurrent. 
Judicabunt  nationes  et  domina- 
buntur  populis,  et  regnabit 
Dominus  illorum  in  perpetuum." 


Eccli.  XXVII.  13. 

"In  medio  insensatorum,  serva 
verbum  tempori ;  in  medio  autem 
cogitantium,  assiduus  esto." 

Sap.  VII.  24. 

"  Omnibus  enim  mobilibus  mo- 
bilior  est  sapientia ;  attingit 
autem  ubique  propter  suam  mun- 
ditiam." 

Sap.  VI.  8. 

"Non  enim  subtrahet  personam 
cujusquam  Deus,  nee  verebitur 
magnitudinemcujusquam;  quon- 
iam pusillum  et  magnum  ipse 
fecit,  et  aequaliter  cura  est  illi 
deomnibus." 

Sap.  IX.  17—18. 

"Consilium  enim  tuum  quis 
sciet,  nisi  tu  dederis  sapientiam, 
et  miseris  spiritum  sanctum  tuum 


Ibid.  Cap.  XVI. 

^''Divina  Scriptura  dicit  de  mar- 
tyribus :  '  Visi  sunt  oculis  in- 
sipientium mori,  et  reputata  est 
vexatio  eorum  exitus,  et  a  nobis 
discessus  contritio  ;  illi  vero  sunt 
in  pace.  Etenim  si  in  oculis 
hominum  suppliciis  affecti  fuer- 
int  spes  eorum  plena  est  immor- 

talitatis Et  in  paucis  castigati, 

magnis  afficienturbeneficiis,quo- 
niam  Deus  tentavit  eos. . .  .et  in- 
venit eos  se  dignos,  ut  scilicet 
vocenturfilii.  Tamquam  aurum 
in  fornace  probavit  eos,  et  tam- 
quam solidam  sacrificii  obla- 
tionem  excepit  eos,  et  in  tempore 
inspectionis  eorum  fulgebunt,  et 
tamquam  scintillae  in  stipula 
percurrent.  Judicabunt  gentes, 
et  dominabuntur  populis,  et  rex 
eorum  erit  Dominus  in  ssecula.'  " 

Clem.  Strom.  Lib.  V.  3. 

"  In  medio  insipientium,  ob- 
serva  occasionem  ;  in  medio  au- 
tem cogitantium,  versare  per- 
petuo." 

Clem.  Strom.  Lib.V.  Cap.  XIV. 

"  Quibus  illud  Sapientiae  im- 
posuit :  Pervadit  autem  ac  subit 
per  omnia  propter  suam  mundi- 
tiam." 

Clem.  Strom.  Lib.  VI.  Cap.  VI, 
"  Non  enim  personam  respicit 
et  reveretur  qui  est  omnium 
Dominus  :  neque  curabit  magni- 
tudinem,  quoniam  ipse  fecit  mag- 
num et  parvum,  et  similitur  om- 
nibus providet,  et  omnium  curam 
gerit." 

Clem.  Strom.  Lib.  VI.  Cap.  XL 

"  Veritas  autem  per  Dominum: 

*  Consilium   enim   tuum,  inquit, 

quis  novit,  si  non  tu  dederis  sapi- 


82 


THE  CANON  OF    THE  CHURCH. 


de  Altissimis  ?  et  sic  correctse 
sint  semitae  eorum  qui  sunt  in 
terris  et  quae  tibi  placent  didi- 
cerint  homines." 


Sap.  VI.  II. 

"  Qui  enira  custodierint  justa 
juste  justificabuntur,  et  qui  didi- 
cerint  ista  invenient  quid  re- 
spondeant." 

Sap.  VII.   1 6. 

"  In  manu  enim  illius  et  nos, 
et  sermones  nostri,  et  omnis 
sapientia,  et  operum  scientia  et 
disciplina." 

Ibid.  28. 

"Neminem  enim  diligit  Deus, 
nisi  eum  qui  cum  sapientia  in- 
habitat." 

Sap.  XIV.  2-3. 

"  Illud  enim  cupiditas  acqui- 
rendi  excogitavit,  et  artifex  f abri- 
cavit  sapientia  sua.  Tua  autem, 
Pater,  providentia  gubernat — ." 

Sap.  VIII.  9. 

"  Et  si  justitiam  quis  diligit, 
labores  hujus  magnas  habent  vir- 
tutes,  sobrietatem  enim  et  pru- 
dentiam  docet  et  justitiam  et 
virtutem,  quibus  utilius  nihil  est 
in  vita  hominibus,  et  nescierunt 
sacramenta  Dei  ....  Quoniam 
Deus  creavit  hominera  inexter- 
minabilem,  et  ad  imaginem  sim- 
ilitudinis  suae  fecit  ilium." 

Tob.  XII.  8. 

"  Bona  est  oratio  cum  jejunio, 
et  eleemosyna  magis  quam  the- 
sauros  auri  recondere." 


entiam,  et  miseris  sanctum  tuum 
Spiritum  ab  altissimis,  et  ita  cor- 
rectae  fuerint  viae  eorum  qui 
sunt  in  terra,  et  didicerint  hom- 
ines ea  quae  tibi  placent,  et  salvi 
fuerint  sapientia.'" 

Ibid. 

"Qui  enim  sancta,  inquit, 
sancte  servant  sanctificabuntur, 
et  qui  ea  didicerint  inveniunt  re- 
sponsionem." 

Ibid. 

"Et  rursus  licet  audire  :  'In 
manu  enim  ejus,  hoc  est,  virtute 
et  sapientia,  et  nos  et  verba  nos- 
tra, et  omnis  prudentia  et  operum 
scientia.  Nihil  enim  diligit  Deus 
nisi  eum  qui  cohabitat  cum  sapi- 
entia. Praeterea  autem  non 
legerunt  quod  dictum  est  a 
Salomone.  Nam  cum  de  templi 
constructione  tractasset,  aperte 
dicit :  Artifex  autem  construxit 
sapientia  ;  tua  autem,  Pater,  gub- 
ernat providentia.'" 

Ibid. 

"  Et  si  quis  diligit  justitiam, 
labores  ejus  sunt  virtutes;  tem- 
perantia  enim  et  prudentia  docet 
justitiam  et  fortitudinem,  quibus 
nihil  est  in  vita  hominibus 
utilius." 


Clem.  Strom.  Lib.  VI.  Cap. 
XII. 

"  Sed,  ut  videtur,  Dei  non 
novere  mysteria,  quod,  scilicet, 
Deus  creavit  hominem  ob  immor- 
talitatem,  et  fecit  eum  imaginem 
suae  proprietatis." 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   CHURCH. 


83 


Sap.  IV.  17. 

"Videbunt  enim  finem  sapi- 
entis,  et  non  intelligent  quid  cogi- 
taverit  de  illo  Deus,  et  quare 
munierit  ilium  Dominus." 

Ibid.'  Cap.  V.  3. 

" — dicentes  intra  se,  poenitu- 
dine  acti  et  prae  augustia  spiritus 
gementes  :  hi  sunt  quos  habui- 
mus  aliquando  in  derisum,  et  in 
similitudinem  improperii ;  nos 
insensati  vitam  illorum  aestima- 
bamus  insaniam,  et  finem  illo- 
rum sine  honore  ;  ecce  quomodo 
computati  sunt  inter  filios  Dei,  et 
inter  sanctos  sors  illorum  est." 


Eccli.  XVIII.  8. 

**  Numerus  dierum  hominum, 
ut  multum,  centum  anni ;  quasi 
gutta  aquae  maris  deputati  sunt, 
et  sicut  calculus  arenae,  sic  exi- 
gui  anni  in  die  aevi." 

Sap.  III.  9. 

"  Qui  confidunt  in  illo,  intelli- 
gent veritatem,  et  fideles  in  dilec- 
tione  acquiescent  illi." 

Sap.  Ill  14. 

"  —  dabitur  enim  illi  fidei  do- 
num  electum,  et  sors  in  templo 
Dei  acceptissima." 

Sap.  VI.  13 — 21. 

"  Clara  est  et  quae  nunquam 
marcescit  sapientia,  et  facile  vi- 
detur  ab  his  qui  diligunt  eam,  et 
invenietur  ab  his  qui  quaerunt 
illam.  Praeoccupat  qui  se  con- 
cupiscunt  ut  illis  se  prior  osten- 
dat.     Qui  de  luce  vigilaverit  ad 


Ibid. 

"  Exaudiens  Scripturam  quae 
dicit:  *Bonum  est  jejunium  cum 
oratione.'  " 


Clem,  Strom.  Lib.  VI.  Cap. 
XIV. 

"  Videbunt  enim  mortem  sapi- 
entis,  et  non  intelligent  quid  de 
eo  decreverit,  et  ad  quid  eum 
stabilierit  Dominus,  et  dicent  de 
ejus  gloria :  *Is  est  quem  ali- 
quando habuimus  in  derisum  et 
in  parabolam  opprobrii  insipien- 
tes.  Vitam  ejus  existimavimus 
insaniam,  et  mortem  ejus  ignomi- 
niosam.  Quomodo  est  enumera- 
tus  inter  filios  Dei,  et  in  Sanctis 
est  sors  ejus.' " 

Ibid. 

**  Reputati  sunt,  inquit,  ut  pul- 
vis  terrae,  et  ut  gutta  ex  cado." 


Ibid. 

"Merito  ergo  dictum  est :  *Et 
qui  in  ipso  confidunt,  intelligent 
veritatem,  et  fideles  in  dilectione 
in  ipso  permanebunt.' " 

Ibid. 

"  Ecce  enim  Salomon  :  Dabi- 
tur enim  ei,  inquit,  fidei  gratia 
electa,  et  sors  in  templo  Domini 
jucundior." 

Clem.  Strom.  Lib. VI.  Cap.  XV. 

"Salomon  haec  dicit :  'Clara 
est  et  non  marcescit  sapientia,  et 
facile  cernitur  ab  iis  qui  ipsam 
diligunt  :  eos  qui  cupiunt  prse- 
venit,  ut  praecognoscatur.  Qui 
mane  surrexerit  ad  ipsam  non 
laborabit ;  de  ipso  enim  cogitare 


84  THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH, 

illam  non   laborabit,  assidentem  est  perfectio  prudentiae.      Et  qui 

enim  ilium  foribus  suis  inveniet.  propter    ipsam    vigilaverit    cito 

Cogitare  ergo  de  ilia  sensus  est  erit  cura  vacuus  ;   quoniam  eos 

consummatus,  et  qui  vigilaverit  qui  ipsa  digni  sunt,  ipsa  quaerens 

propter  ilium  cito   securus  erit.  circuit,    et    in    semitis   ab    ipsis 

Quoniam  dignos  se  ipsa  circuit  benevole  visione  apprehenditur.' 

quaerens,  et    in  viis  ostendit  se  Mox    subjungit  :     'Et    in   omni 

illis  hilariter,  et  in   omni  provi-  cogitatione  occurrit  ipsis ejus 

dentia     occurrit     illis.      Initium  enim  principium  verissimum  est 

enim  illius  verissima  est  discip-  desiderium    disciplinae,  hoc  est, 

linae  concupiscentia.     Cura  ergo  cognitionis  ;  cura  autem  discip- 

disciplinae  dilectio  est,  et  dilectio  linse  est  dilectio  ;  dilectio  autem 

custodia  legum  illius  est ;  custo-  est  observatio  legum  ejus  ;  atten- 

ditio  autem  legum  consummatio  tio  autem  legum  est  incorruptibi- 

incorruptionis    est ;    incorruptio  litatis    confirmatio  ;    incorrupti- 

autem  facit  esse  proximum  Deo.  bilitas  autem  facit  ut  ad  Deum 

Concupiscentia  itaque  sapientiae  prope  accedatur.    Sapientiae  ergo 

deducit  ad  regnum  perpetuum."  desiderium  attollit  ad  regnum.'" 

Clement  of  Alexandria  weaves  the  woof  of  his  fabric  from 
Scripture.  His  II.  Paedogogus  could  be  properly  called  a  com- 
mentary on  Ecclesiasticus.  He  uses  the  deuterocanonical 
works  as  divine  Scripture ;  plainly  terms  them  so ;  and  was 
evidently  very  familiar  with  them.  As  he  was  the  coryphaeus 
of  the  Alexandrian  church  in  that  age,  we  can  deduce  from  his 
line  of  action  that  the  great  Alexandrian  church  in  the  age 
succeeding  the  Apostles,  received  and  used  the  deuterocanoni- 
cal books  with  equal  honor  as  the  books  of  the  first  Canon. 

Turning  from  the  master  to  his  greater  pupil,  Origen,  we  find 
him  to  have  prosecuted  the  same  line  of  teaching  as  Clement.* 

*Origen  was  born  of  Christian  parents  at  Alexandria  in  the  year  185,  A.  D. 
He  was  surnamed  Adamantius,  by  reason  of  his  indefatigable  application  to 
mental  toil.  The  vastness  of  his  erudition  is  not  surpassed  by  that  of  any  of 
the  Fathers  of  the  church.  He  was  taught  by  Clement  of  Alexandria,  and, 
at  the  age  of  18,  was  given  the  charge  of  the  instruction  of  the  faithful  at 
Alexandria.  To  preclude  the  taint  which  calumny  strove  to  attach  to  his  name, 
he,  by  means  of  a  drug,  destroyed  the  energy  of  his  generative  organs.  He 
was  led  to  this  move  by  a  false  literal  interpretation  of  the  praise  of  eunuchs 
by  Christ,  in  the  Gospels.  Origen  visited  Rome,  Palestine,  Greece,  Arabia 
and  other  lands.  While  in  Palestine,  he  was  deputed  by  the  bishops  to  explain 
publicly  the  Holy  Scripture.  Demetrius,  his  bishop,  objected  to  this,  on  the 
grounds  that  it  was  not  fitting  for  a  layman  to  teach  the  Holy  Scriptures. 
Origen  was  afterwards  ordained  priest  by  Theoctistus,  bishop  of  Caesarea  in 
Palestine.  Demetrius  then  deposed  Origen  on  the  grounds  that  he  was  a 
eunuch,  that  he  had  been  ordained  without  consent  of  his  own  bishop,  and 
that  he  had  taught  heresy.  Origen  was  obliged  to  retire  to  Caesarea  till  after  the 
death  of  Demetrius  in  231.  Under  Maximin  he  was  cast  into  prison  and 
treated  with  great  indignity.    It  is  charged  by  Epiphanius,  and  others,  that, 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH.  85 

It  is  impossible  to  give  a  detailed  mention  of  his  many- 
works.  Later  in  our  book  we  shall  treat  of  his  great  Hexapla. 
Other  of  his  chief  works  are :  Eight  Books  against  Celsus,  De 
Principiis  libri  quattuor,  and  Homilies  and  Commentaries  on 
Holy  Scripture. 

We  have  thought  good  to  transcribe  and  collate  many 
citations  from  Origen,  since  the  adversaries  of  the  deutero- 
canonical  books  have  alleged  his  authority  in  support  of  their 
curtailed  canon.  Nowhere  in  patristic  literature  do  we  find 
such  copious  and  apposite  use  of  Holy  Scripture  as  in  Origen. 
His  works  that  have  been  preserved  to  us  resemble  a  mosaic 
in  which  his  own  creations  serve  only  as  the  setting  in  which 
are  infixed  the  scriptural  gems.  No  discrimination  is  made  in 
favor  of  the  books  of  the  first  canon.  He  rejects  and  treats 
with  irony  the  adoption  of  the  Jewish  canon.  In  his  letter  to 
Julius  Africanus,f  he  defends  the  deuterocanonical  fragments 
of  Daniel,  and  imphes  that  the  canon  must  be  sought  from 
the  authority  of  the  Church,  and  not  from  the  Jews:  "  Know, 
therefore,  in  answer  to  these  things,  what  should  be  our  line 
of  action,  not  only  concerning  the  history  of  Susanna,  whichy 
in  its  Greek  exemplar,  circulates  through  the  whole  Church  of 
Christ,  although  it  does  not  exist  with  the  Hebrews ;  and  not 

to  escape  from  prison,  Origen  offered  incense  to  Serapis.  The  data  are  want- 
ing to  establish  either  the  truth  or  falsity  of  this  imputation.  He  died  at  Tyr 
in  254.  To  Origen,  have  been  imputed  many  pernicious  errors.  He  was  con- 
demned by  the  fifth  general  council,  and  again,  Martin  the  fifth  anathematized 
him  in  the  first  Council  of  Lateran  in  649.  In  that  formative  period,  before 
the  Christian  dogmas  became  moulded  with  the  precision  and  deflniteness, 
which  the  natural  development  of  doctrine  subsequently  gave  them  ;  when 
men  strove  to  unite  the  philosophy  of  Plato  with  the  divine  teachings  of 
Christ,  it  was  not  strange  that  a  man  deeply  imbued  with  Greek  thought, 
should  in  good  faith,  have  advocated  theories  which  closer  investigation  found 
to  be  untenable  in  the  Catholic  Church.  Without  the  aid  of  divine  revelation, 
it  would  be  strange  that  a  man  should  write  so  much  on  the  subjects  on 
which  Origen  wrote,  and  never  write  amiss.  These  errors  should  not  be  con- 
sidered as  a  malicious  intent  to  infect  the  teachings  of  the  Church,  but  an 
evidence  of  the  def  ectibility  of  human  reason.  Origen  has  done  the  church  in- 
valuable service,  and,  though  not  ranked  with  the  Fathers,  he  will  always  be 
appealed  to  in  questions  which  need  the  testimony  of  tradition  for  their 
solution. 


f  Julius  Africanus  was  a  Christian  historian,  who  flourished  in  the  third 
century,  under  Heliogabalus.  He  was  of  Nicopolis,  in  Palestine.  He  is  t 
author  of  a  universal  history  from  Adam  down  to  Macrinus,  whose  scope 
was  to  prove  that  paganism  was  an  innovation.  Only  fragments  of  the 
work  are  preserved  to  us  by  Eusebius.  Africanus  controverted  the  genuinity 
of  the  history  of  Susanna,  concerning  which  he  wrote  to  Origen.  One  of 
his  most  valuable  contributions  to  the  patrimony  of  science  is  his  reconcilia- 
tion of  the  diverse  genealogies  of  Jesus  Christ  in  Matthew  and  Luke. 


86  THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

only  concerning  the  other  parts,  which,  as  you  have  said,  are 
written  in  the  end  of  the  book,  namely,  concerning  Bel  and 
the  Dragon,  which  also  are  wanting  in  the  Hebrew  text  ;  but 
also  concerning  many  other  parts,  which,  while  we  compared, 
according  to  our  powers,  the  Hebrew  with  our  own  text,  we 
found  in  many  places."  Soon  he  breaks  forth  into  irony: 
"  Forsooth,  the  time  is  at  hand,  if  we  have  discovered  these 
things,  to  abrogate  the  exemplars  of  Holy  Scripture  of  our 
churches,  and  impose  the  law  upon  the  brethren  that,  reject- 
ing the  sacred  books  which  they  have,  they,  by  adulation, 
persuade  the  Jews  to  concede  to  us  the  Scriptures  pure  and 
devoid  of  figment.  *  *  *  In  relation  to  these  things,  con- 
sider whether  it  be  not  good  to  remember  the  saying :  pass 
not  beyond  the  ancient  bounds  which  thy  fathers  have  set. 
(Prov.  XXII.  28).  And  I  say  this,  not,  indeed,  that  I,  through 
sloth,  refuse  to  examine  the  Scriptures  which  the  Jews  have, 
and  compare  them  with  ours,  to  see  what  diversity  between 
them  exists.  This,  forsooth,  if  it  be  not  arrogant  to  say,  we 
have  diligently,  and,  according  to  our  ability,  done  ;  comparing 
with  great  care  the  editions,  and  observing  their  divergencies* 
thus,  however,  that  we  have  bestowed  somewhat  more  labor 
on  the  Septuagint,  that  we  might  not  bring  anything  spurious 
into  the  Churches,  which  are  beneath  the  whole  heavens, 
•x-  *  *  \Yg  endeavor  not  to  be  ignorant  of  the  Scriptures 
which  the  Jews  have,  so  that,  discussing  with  them,  we  may 
not  bring  forth  those  things  which  are  wanting  in  their 
exemplars,  and  we  also  make  use  of  those  portions  which  are 
found  with  them,  and  are  not  in  our  books." 

Many  of  the  early  Fathers  were  forced  to  meet  the  Jews 
on  their  own  ground,  and  thus  in  disputes  with  them,  to  use 
only  the  curtailed  canon  which  the  Jews  recognized.  Thus 
Jerome  in  Praef.  in  Isaiah  affirms  :  "  May  He  give  me  my 
future  reward  who  knows  me  to  have  labored  and  sweat  in  the 
acquisition  of  this  foreign  tongue,  so  that  the  Jews  might  not 
longer  insult  the  Christians  on  the  charge  of  the  falsity  of  their 
Scriptures."  This  need  also,  was  the  motive  for  the  lists  drawn 
up  by  some  of  the  Fathers,  in  which  the  deuterocanonical  books 
were  excluded.  Even  Origen  himself  has  made  such  list,  but 
he  openly  declares  that  it  is  thb  canon  according  to  the  Hebrews. 
The  Jews  by  their  ridicule  of  the  deuterocanonical  books 
may  have  led  some  individual  Fathers  to  doubt  of  the 
equality  of  inspiration  of  the  books  of  the  second  canon. 
As  the  rationalists  of  to-day  sometimes  obtain  from  Cath- 
olics unwarranted  concessions,  lest   they  should    seem   to  be 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   CHURCH.  87 

ignorant  ;  so  those  other  earlier  enemies  of  truth  may  have 
diminished  in  the  minds  of  some  the  authority  of  the  deutero- 
canonical  works.  This  they  certainly  effected  in  the  mind  of 
Jerome.  We  see  that  Africanus  rejected  the  deuterocanonical 
fragment  of  Susanna.  Origen  describes  the  existing  state  of 
things  very  well  in  his  response  to  Africanus.  The  complete 
canon  circulated  throughout  the  universal  Church  ;  the  Jews 
and  some  few  individuals  advocated  the  restricted  canon  of 
the  Jews.  Origen  in  plain  words  ridicules  the  theory  which 
the  protestants  of  to-day  advocate,  and  yet  they  would  claim 
his  authority. 

Origen  endorses  Tobias  in  Hist.  Susannas,  13  :  **  We  must 
know,  therefore,  that  the  Hebrews  use  neither  Tobias  nor 
Judith.  For  the  Hebrews  have  not  these  books  even  among 
the  Apocrypha  as  we  ourselves  have  learned  from  them.  But 
since  the  Churches  use  Tobias,  we  must  know  that  also  in  the 
captivity  some  captives  were  opulent  and  prospered."  Origen 
essays  to  defend  the  book  of  Tobias,  not  that  the  Hebrews  ac- 
knowledge it,  but    because  the   Churches  use  it. 

Two  things  result  for  us  from  Origen's  testimonies.  First, 
that  the  usage  of  the  Churches  of  his  age  recognized  the 
divinity  of  the  deuterocanonical  books ;  and,  second,  that  he 
considered  this  usage  a  criterion  of  inspiration.  He  can  never 
be  honestly  claimed  to  have  favored  the  protestant  theory  of 
accepting  the  canon  from  the  Jews. 

The  Canon  of  Origen  is  found  in  his  Commentary  on 
the  first  Psalm,  Parag.  I :  "  The  twenty-two  books  according 
to  the  Hebrews  are  these ":  The  first  which  is  called  by 
us  Genesis  is  termed  by  them,  from  its  opening  words, 
Beresith  which  signifies  "  In  the  beginning."  Then  Exodus, 
with  Hebrews  Vellesemoth,  interpreted,  "These  are  the  names." 
The  third,  Leviticus,  with  the  Hebrews,  Vajicra,  that  is,  "  And 
he  called."  The  fourth,  Numbers,  with  the  Hebrews  Hammis- 
phecodim.*  The  fifth,  Deuteronomy,  with  the  Hebrews  Elle 
haddebarim,  that  is,  "these  are  the  words."  The  sixth,  Jesus 
the  son  of  Nave,  in  Hebrew,  Jehoshua  ben  Nun.  The  seventh, 
Judges  and  Ruth,  by  the  Hebrews  comprised  in  one  volume, 
which  they  call  Sophetim.  The  eighth  is  the  first  and  second 
book  of  the  Kingdoms,  which  with  them  constitute  one  volume 
which  is  called  Samuel,  that  is  "  The  called  of  God."     The 

*The  appellation  Hammisphecodim  for  the  book  of  Numbers  is  only- 
found  in  Origen.  Its  signification  is  unknown  to  us.  The  common  designa- 
tion of  the  book  in  Hebrew  was  *12T^  \  "  et  locutus  est." 


88  THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 

ninth  is  the  third  and  fourth  of  the  Kingdoms,  which  they  also 
comprise  in  one  volume  and  call  Vammelech  David,  that  is, 
"  The  Kingdom  of  David."  The  tenth  is  the  first  and  second 
of  Paralipomenon,  by  them  comprised  in  one  volume,  which 
they  call  Dibre  Hajamim,  that  is,  "  The  Words  of  the  Days." 
The  eleventh  is  the  first  and  second  of  Esdras,  which  with 
them  constitute  one  volume,  which  they  call  Ezra,  that  is, 
"  The  Helper."  The  twelfth  is  the  book  of  Psalms,  with  the 
Hebrews  Sepher  Tehillim.  The  thirteenth  is  the  Proverbs  of 
Solomon,  with  the  Hebrews  Misloth.  The  fourteenth  is 
Ecclesiastes,  with  the  Hebrews  Koheleth.  The  fifteenth  is  the 
Canticle  of  Canticles,  with  the  Hebrews  Sir  Hassirim.  The 
sixteenth  is  Isaias,  with  the  Hebrews  Jesaia.  The  seventeenth 
is  Jeremias  with  the  Lamentation  and  Epistle,  by  them  com- 
prised in  one  volume,  which  they  call  Jirmia.  The  eighteenth 
is  Daniel,  with  the  Hebrews  Daniel.  The  nineteenth  is 
Ezechiel,  with  the  Hebrews  Jeezchel.  The  twentieth  is  Job, 
by  the  Hebrews  designated  by  the  same  name.  The  twenty- 
first  is  Esther,  which  is  also  thus  designated  by  the  Hebrews. 
Outside  this  enumeration  are  the  books  of  Maccabees  which 
are   inscribed    "Sarbet  Sarbaneel." 

In  this  list,  the  twelve  minor  Prophets,  by  the  Hebrews  com- 
prised in  one  book  is  omitted.  It  must  have  been,  however, 
through  inadvertence  on  the  part  of  Origen  or  the  amanuensis, 
since  this  book  was  never  doubted.  The  care  bestowed  by 
Origen  and  other  Fathers  in  preparing  these  lists  was  for  the 
purpose  of  fitting  the  Christians  to  meet  the  Jews  on  com- 
mon grounds.  This  was  necessary  in  that  age,  when  the  chief 
intellectual  attacks  on  Christianity  came  from  the  Jews.  The 
following  collated  passages  will  illustrate  Origen's  attitude 
towards  the  deuterocanonical  works  : 

Tob.  I.  13 — 22.  Orig.  De  Hist.   Sus.  13. 

(Already  quoted.)  (Already  quoted.) 

Judith  XI.  Passim.  Orig.  Frag.  Ex  Lib.  VI.  Strom. 

"  Homo  autem,  cui  incumbit 
necessitas  mentiendi,  diligenter 
attendat  ut  sic  utatur  interdum 
mendacio  quomodo  condimento 
atque  medicamine,  ut  servet 
mensuram  ejus,  ne  excedat  ter- 
minos  quibus  usa  est  Judith  con- 
tra Holophernem,  et  vicit  prudenti 
simulatione  verborum." 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   CHURCH. 


89 


Dan.  XIII. 

"  Et  erat  vir  habitans  in  Baby- 
lone,  et  nomen  ejus  Joakim,  etc." 


Sap.  VII.  25. 

"  Vapor  est  enim  virtutis  Dei, 
et  emanatio  quaedam  est  clarita- 
tis  omnipotentis  Dei  sincera — " 


Orig.  Ex  Lib.  Stromatum. 

"Et  erat  vir  habitans  in  Baby- 
lone,  et  nomen  ejus  Joacim,  et 
accepit  uxorem  nomine  Susan- 
nam,  filiam  Helciae,  pulchram 
nimis  et  timentem  Dominum.  Et 
parentes  ejus  justi  edocuerunt 
filiam  suam  juxta  legem  Moysi. 

Hoc  utendum  est  testimonio  ad 
exhortationem  parentum,  ut  do- 
ceant  juxta  legem  Dei  sermon- 
emque  divinum,  non  solum  filios, 

sed  et  filias  suas , . 

Quia  Hfcbrsei  re- 

probant  historiam  Susannae,  di- 
centes  eam  in  Danielis  volumine 
non  haberi,  debemus  inquirere 
nomina  o-p^tVov,  ^koL  irpCvov  quae 
Latini  ilicem  et  lentiscum  inter- 
pretantur,  si  sint  apud  Hebraeos, 
et  quam  habeant  etymologiam,  ut 
a  a'x^ivw,  scissio,  et  a  Trpivo),  sec- 
tio  sive  serratio  dicatur  lingua 
eorum.  Quod  si  non  fuerit  in- 
ventum,  necesitate  cogemur  et 
nos  eorum  acquiescere  sententiae, 
qui  Graecitantum  sermonishanc 
volunt  esse  irepiKoirrjv,  quae 
Graecam  habeat  tantum  etymolo- 
giam, et  Hebraicam  non  habeat. 
Quod  si  quis  ostenderit  duarum 
scissionis  et  sectionis  in  Hebraeo 
stare  etymologiam,  tunc  poteri- 
mus  eliam  banc  Scripturam  reci- 
pere." 

Orig,  De    Principiis,    Lib.    I. 
Cap.  II. 

"  Invenimus  nihilominus  in  Sa- 
pientia,  quae  dicitur  Salomonis, 
descriptionem  quamdam  de  Dei 
Sapientia  hoc  modo  scriptam  : 
'Vapor  est  enim,  inquit,  virtutis 
Dei  et  ajroppoia  gloriae  omnipo- 
tentis purissima.'  " 


90 


THE  CANON   OF  THE   CHURCH. 


Ibid.  VII.  25—26. 

Sap.  XVIII.  24. 

"  In  veste  enim  poderis,  quam 
habebat,  totus  erat  orbis  terra- 
rum — ." 


Eccl.  XLIII.  22. 


ventus 


aquilo 


Ibid. 

Orig.   De  Princ.  Lib.  II.  Cap. 
III.  6. 

"  —  sicut  in  Sapientia  Salo- 
monis  invenimus,  cum  dicit  quia: 
*  In  vestimento  poderis  erat  uni- 
versus  mundus.'  " 

Orig.  Ibid.  Cap.  VIII.  3. 

"  —  sicut  scriptum  est  in  Sapi- 
entia: 'Frigidus  ventus  Boreas.' " 

Ibid. 

"  Anima  mala  perdit  eum  qui 
possidet  earn." 

Ibid.  Cap.  IX.  i. 

"  Porro  autem,  sicut  Scriptura 
dicit:  *In  numero  et  mensura, 
universacondidit  Deus — .'  " 

Orig.  De  Prin.  Lib.  IIL  14. 

"  *  In  manu  enim  Dei,  et  nos,  et 
sermones  nostri,et  omnis  pruden- 
tia  atque  operum  disciplina 
est '  sicut  Scriptura  dicit." 

Orig.  De  Prin.  Lib.  IV.  26. 

"Quia  scriptum  est :  *Quam- 
plurima  ex  operibus  Dei  in  secre- 

tis  sunt.'  " 

Ibid.  33. 

"  In  Sapientia  quae  dicitur 
Salomonis,  qui  utique  liber  non 
ab  omnibus  in  auctoritate  habe- 
tur.  Ibi  tamen  scriptum  inveni- 
mus  hoc  modo  :  *  Non  enim,' 
inquit,  '  deerat  omnipotenti 
manu  tuae,  quae  creaverat  mun- 
dum  ex  informi  materia,  immit- 
tere  eis  multitudinem  ursorum 
vel  feroces  leones.'  " 

Origen  here  records  the  doubts  of  some,  without  making 
them  his  own.  Certain  individuals  have  doubted  concerning 
the  deuterocanonical  works  ;  the  Church  never  doubted.  In 
quoting  the   book  as  Scripture,  Origen  follows  the  Church. 


"  Frigidus 
flavit— ." 

Eccli.  VI.  4. 


"  Anima  enim  nequam  disper- 
det,  qui  se  habet." 

Sap.  XL  21. 

" —  sed  omnia  in  mensura  et 
numero  et  pondere  disposuisti." 

Sap.  Vli.  16. 

" — in  manu  enim  illius  et  nos, 
et  sermones  nostri,  et  omnis  Sapi- 
entia et  operum  scientia,  et  dis- 
ciplina." 

Eccli.  XVI.  22. 


"  Nam    plurima    illius 
sunt  in  absconsis — ." 


opera 


Sap.  XL  18. 

"  Non  enim  impossibilis  erat 
omnipotens  manus  tua,  quae 
creavit  orbem  terrarum  ex  mate- 
ria invisa,  immittere  illis  multi- 
tudinem ursorum,  aut  audaces 
leones — ." 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   CHURCH.  91 

This  can  be  said  in  general  ;  the  Fathers,  in  their  practical  use 
of  Scripture,  reflect  the  belief  of  the  Church.  If  they  put 
forth,  at  times,  speculative  doubts,  they  are  then  speaking  as 
fallible  individuals.  This  principle  has  been  recognized  by  the 
protestant  Davidson. 

"  It  is  sometimes  said  that  the  history  of  the  Canon  should 
be  sought  from  definite  catalogues,  not  from  isolated  quota- 
tions. The  latter  are  supposed  to  be  of  slight  value ;  the 
former  to  be  the  result  of  deliberate  judgment.  This  remark 
is  more  specious  than  solid.  In  relation  to  the  Old  Testament, 
the  catalogues  given  by  the  Fathers,  as  by  Meliton  and  Origen, 
rest  solely  on  the  tradition  of  the  Jews  ;  apart  from  which, 
they  have  no  independent  authority.  As  none  except  Jerome 
and  Origen  knew  Hebrew,  their  lists  of  the  Old  Testament 
books  are  simply  a  reflection  of  what  they  learned  of  others. 
If  they  deviate  in  practice  from  their  masters  by  quoting  as 
Scripture  other  than  canonical  (protocanonical)  books,  they 
show  their  judgment,  overriding  an  external  theory. 

"  The  very  men  who  give  a  list  of  the  Jewish  books,  evince 
an  inclination  to  the  Christian  and  enlarged  Canon.  Thus  the 
Fathers,  who  give  catalogues  of  the  Old  Testament,  show  the 
existence  of  a  Jewish  and  a  Christian  Canon  in  relation  to  the 
Old  Testament ;  the  latter  wider  than  the  former,  their  private 
opinion  more  favorable  to  the  one,  though  the  other  was  his- 
torically transmitted."    [Davidson,  Canon  of  the  Bible,  p.  132.] 

This  last  clause  is  not  well  said.  It  is  not  the  private 
opinion  of  the  Fathers  that  constitutes  the  basis  of  traditional 
proof  of  our  complete  Canon.  It  is  the  universal  usage  of  the 
Churches  of  the  Christian  people,  which  subjugated  even 
those  who  theoretically  were  disposed  to  doubt.  It  is  the 
belief  identical  with  the  life  of  the  Church,  which  manifests 
itself  in  the  use  which  these  Fathers  made  of  Scripture.  As 
individuals  they  could  err  and  doubt ;  as  faithful  witnesses  of 
the  belief  of  the  Church,  they  hand  down  to  us  the  faith 
which  was  the  same  in  the  beginning,  is  now,  and  ever  shall 
be.  This  capacity  they  fulfill,  as  Davidson  rightly  says,  when 
quoting  the  Scriptures  as  they  were  familiar  to  the  Christian 
people.  Neither  is  Davidson  correct  in  saying  that  the  cur- 
tailed canon  of  the  Jews  was  historically  transmitted.  If  he 
means  by  this  that  the  restricted  canon  was  transmitted  to  us 
by  the  Jews,  it  is  well ;  but  it  is  utterly  false  to  say  that  the 
existing,  recognized  Canon  of  the  Christians  were  such  Canon. 
Impartial  historians,  such  as  Eusebius,  record  the  doubts  of 
isolated  churches  concerning  several  books,  but  these  doubts 


92 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


never  could  be  said  to  have  pervaded  the  whole  Church. 
Such  a  critical  mind,  as  was  that  of  Origen,  would  have  more 
readily  tended  to  reject  the  deuterocanonical  books,  had  he 
not  been  convinced  by  the  belief  and  usage  of  the  universal 
Church.  As  Origen's  authority  is  most  valuable,  we  have 
taken  the  trouble  to  collate  many  passages : 


Sap.  IX.  13 — 16. 

"  Quis  enim  hominem  poterit 
scire  consilium  Dei  ?  Aut  quis 
poterit  cogitare  quid  velit  Deus  ? 
Cogitationes  enim  mortalium 
timidae ;  et  incertae  providen- 
tiae  nostrae  ;  corpus  enim  quod 
corrumpitur  aggravat  animam,  et 
terrena  inhabitatio  deprimit  sen- 
sum  multa  cogitantem,  et  difficile 
aestimamus  quae  in  terra  sunt,  et 
quae  in  prospectu  sunt  inveni- 
mus  cum  labore.  Quae  autem 
in  coelis  sunt,  quis  investigabit  ?" 

Sap.  XI.  25. 

"  Diligis  enim  omnia  quae 
sunt,  et  nihil  odisti  eorum  quae 
fecisti — ." 

Sap.  I.  7. 

"  Quoniam  Spiritus  Domini  re- 
plevit  orbem  terrarum." 

Tob.  III.  24—25. 

"In  illo  tempore  exauditae  sunt 
preces  amborum  in  conspectu 
gloriae  summi  Dei,  et  missus  est 
angelus  Domini,  Sanctus  Raph- 
ael, ut  curaret  eos  ambos." 


Tob.  XII.  12  (juxtaGraecum). 

"  Ac  modo  cum  tu,  et  Sara 
nurus  tua  orastis,  memoriam  pre- 
cum  vestrarum  coram  Sancto 
retuli." 


Orig.  Lib.  De  Oratione,  I. 

"  Quis  enim  hominum  poterit 
scire  consilium  Dei  ?  Aut  quis 
poterit  cogitare  quid  Deus  velit  ? 
Cogitationes  enim  mortalium 
timidae;  et  incertae  providentiae 
nostrae,  corpus  enim  quod  cor- 
rumpitur aggravat  animam,  et 
terrena  inhabitatio  deprimit  sen- 
sum  multa  cogitantem;  et  difficile 
aestimamus  quae  in  terra  sunt. 
Quae  autem  in  coelis  sunt,  quis 
investigavit  ?" 

Ibid.  5. 

"  — diligitque  omnia  quae  sunt, 
et  nihil  odit  eorum  quae   fecit." 

Ibid.  10. 

"  Magis  idoneus  fit  commisceri 
'  Spiritui  Domini  qui  replevit 
orbem  terrarum.'  " 

Ibid.  II. 

"  Quae  inde  patent,  quod  Ra- 
phael obtulerit  Deo  rationabile 
obsequium  Tobiae  et  Sarae. 
'Nam  post  utriusque  orationem, 
exaudita  est,  inquit  Scriptura, 
deprecatio  utrorumque  coram 
gloria  magni  Raphael,  et  missus 
est  ad  sanandum  ambos.*  " 

Ibid. 

"  *  Et  nunc  quando  orasti  tu, 
et  nurus  tua  Sara,  ego  obtuli 
memoriale  orationis  vestrae  co- 
ram  Sancto.'     Et    post    pauca : 


THE   CANON   OF    THE   CHURCH. 


93 


Ibid.  15  (juxta  Graecum). 

"  Ego  sum  Raphael,  unus  ex 
septem  Sanctis  Angelis  qui  pieces 
sanctorum  ad  Deum  offerunt,  at- 
que  ambulant  ante  majestatem 
Sancti." 

Ibid.  8  (juxta  Graecum). 

"  Bonae  sunt  pieces  quae  cum 
jejunio  et  beneficentia  justitiaque 
conjunctae  sunt." 

II.  Maccab.  XV.  13 — 16. 

"  Post  hoc  apparuisse  et  alium 
virum  aetate  et  gloria  miiabilem, 
et  magni  decoris  habitudine 
circa  ilium  ;  lespondentem  veio 
Oniam  dixisse  :  Hie  est  fiatrum 
amator,  et  populi  Israel  :  hie  est 
qui  multum  orat  pro  populo  et 
universa  sancta  civitate,  Jeremias 
propheta  Dei.  Extendisse  autem 
Jeremiam  dexteram,  et  dedisse 
Judae  gladium  aureum  dicentem: 
accipe  sanctum  gladium,  munus 
a  Deo,  in  quo  dejicies  adveisaiios 
populi  mei  Isiael." 

Judith  XIII.  9—10. 

"Cumque  evagina«set  ilium, 
apprehendit  comam  capitis  ejus, 
et  ait :  Confirma  me,  Domine 
Deus,  in  hac  hora  ;  et  percussit 
bis  in  cervicem  ejus,  et  abscidit 
caput  ejus,  et  abstulit  conopeum 
ejus  a  columnis,  et  evolvit  corpus 
ejus  truncum." 

Judith  VIII.  22.  (juxta  Grae- 
cum.) 

"  Mementote  quae  cum  Abra- 
ham egerit,  quibusque  rebus 
Isaac  probarit,  quae  item  Jacob 
in  Mesopotamia  Syriae  pascenti 
oves  Laban  avunculi  ipsius  acci- 
derint.  Etenim  sicut  illos  ex- 
periundi  cordis  ipsorum  gratia. 


'Ego  sum  Raphael,  unus  ex  sep- 
tem Angelis  qui  offerunt  orationes 
sanctorum,  et  ingrediuntur  in 
conspectu  gloriae  Sancti.'  Itaque 
juxta  Raphaelis  sermonem  :  *  Bo- 
num  oratio  cum  jejunio  et  elee- 
mosyna  et  justitia.'  Item  quod 
Jeremias,  ut  in  Machabaeorum 
libiis  habetui  :  '  appaiueiit  can- 
itie  et  gloria  eximius,  ita  ut  miia- 
bilis  quaedam  et  maximi  decoris 
fueiit  piaestantia  ciica  ilium  : 
extendeiitque  dexteram,  et  de- 
derit  Judae  gladium  aureum,  de 
quo  testatus  est  alius  sanctus  qui 
ante  obierat :  Hie  est  qui  mul- 
tum orat  pro  populo  et  sancta 
civitate, Jeremias,propheta  Dei.' " 


Orig.  De  Oratione,  13. 

"  Judith,  Sanctis  oblatis  preci- 
bus,  Holophernem,  Deo  adju- 
vante,  superavit,  et  una  Hebrae- 
orum  femina  labem  domui 
Nabuchodonosoris  inussit." 


Orig.  De  Orat.  29. 

"  Recordamini  enim,"  ait  Ju- 
dith, "quaecumque  fecit  cum 
Abraham,  et  quaecumque  tentavit 
Isaac,  et  quaecumque  eveneiunt 
Jacob  in  Mesopotamia  Syiiae  pas- 
centi pecoia  Laban  fratris  matris 
suae,  quoniara  sicut  illos  examin- 


94 


THE  CANON   OF  THE  CHURCH. 


ita  nos  probat,  et  non  ulciscitur  ; 
sed  commonitionis  causa  Domi- 
nus  castigat  eos  qui  ei  appropin- 
quant." 

Sap.  XVI.  28. 

" —  ut  notum  omnibus  esset 
quoniam  oportet  praevenire  so- 
lera ad  benedictionem  tuam,  et 
ad  ortum  lucis  te  adorare." 


Tob.  XII.  12. 

(Already  quoted.) 

II.  Maccab.  VI.  19 — 31. 

"  At  ille  gloriossimam  mortem 
magis  quam  odibilem  vitam  com- 
plectens,  voluntarie  praeibat  ad 
supplicium.  Intuens  autem, 
queraadmodum  oporteret  acce- 
dere,  patienter  sustinens,  desti- 
navit  non  admittere  illicita  prop- 
ter vitae  amorem.  Hi  autem,  qui 
astabant,  iniqua  miseratione 
commoti,  propter  antiquam  viri 
amicitiam,  toUentes  eum  secreto 
rogabant  afferi  carnes,  quibus 
vesci  ei  licebat,  ut  simularetur 
manducasse,  sicut  rex  impera- 
verat  de  sacrificii  carnibus  :  ut, 
hoc  facto,  a  morte  liberaretur  : 
et  propter  veterem  viri  amicitiam, 
hanc  in  eo  faciebant  humanita- 
tem.  At  ille  cogitare  coepit 
aetatis  ac  senectutis  suae  eminen- 
tiam  dignam,  et  ingenitae  nobili- 
tatis  canitiem,  atque  a  puero 
optimae  conversationis  actus  :  et 
secundum  sanctae  et  a  Deo  con- 
ditae  legis  constituta,  respondit 
cito,  dicens:  Praemitti  se  velle  in 
infernum.  Non  enim  aetati  nos- 
trae  dignum  est,  inquit ;  fingere  ; 
ut    multi    adolescentium,    arbi- 


avit  in  certamen  cordis  eorum, 
etiam  nos  ulciscitur,  quia  ad 
emendationem  flagellat  Dominus 
appropinquantes  sibi." 

Ibid,  31. 

"  —  et  de  parte  mundi,  in  Sa- 
pientia  Solomonis,  dicitur  :  '  Ut 
notum  esset,  quoniam  oportet 
praevenire  solera  ad  benedic- 
tionera  tuara,  et  ante  ortura  lucis 
te  adorare.' " 

Ibid. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Orig.   Exhortatio   ad    Martyr- 
ium,  22. 

"  Quam  autem  aequius  est  raor- 
tuum  laudari  quara  qui  mortem 
sponte  ac  libere  pro  religione 
oppetiit  ?  Qualis  fuit  Eleazar,  qui 
'  gloriosissimara  raortem  magis 
quam  odibilem  vitam  complec- 
tens,  voluntarie  praeibat  ad  sup- 
plicura,'  quique  'strenuara  as- 
sumens  ratiocinationem  dignam 
aetate  sua  nonagenaria,  et  senec- 
tutis suae  eminentia,  illustrique 
canitie,  atque  optima  a  pueritia 
educatione,  maxime  vero  sancta, 
et  a  Deo  condita  lege  dixit  :  non 
est  aetate  hac  nostra  dignum  fin- 
gere, ut  multi  adolescentes, 
arbitrantes  Eleazarum  nonagenta 
annorum  transisse  ad  vitara  ali- 
enigenarum,  et  ipsi  propter  raeam 
simulationera,et  propter  modicum 
corruptibilis  vitae  tempus  decipi- 
antur  propter  rae,  et  execrationera 
atque  raaculam  senectuti  ac- 
quirara ;  nam  etsi  in  praesenti 
tempore  suppliciis  horainura  erip- 
iar,  sed  manus  Oranipotentis  nee 
vivus  nee  defunctus  effugiam. 
Quamobrem  fortiter  excedendo 
senectute  quidem  dignus  appar- 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


95 


ebo,  adolescentibus  autem  exem- 
plum  forte  relinquam,  ut  prompto 
animo  ac  fortiter  pro  gravissimis 
ac  sanctissimis  legibus  honesta 
morte  perfungantur.' 

Oro  autem  vos  cum  ad  portas 
mortis  imo  libertatis  constituti 
eritis,  maxime  si  tormenta  objici- 
entur,  dicere  Domino,  qui  sanc- 
tam  habet  scientiam  :  *Mani- 
festum  est  quia  cum  a  morte 
possem  liberari,  duros  corporis 
sustineo  dolores,  secundum  ani- 
mam  vero  propter  timorem  ejus 
libenter  haec  patior.* 

Talis  ergo  fuit  Eleazari  mors, 
'qui  non  solum  juvenibus,  sed  et 
plerisque  suae  gentis  mortem 
suam  exemplum  fortitudinis  et 
memoriale  virtutis  reliquit.'  " 


trantes  Eleazarum  nonaginta 
annorum  transisse  ad  vitam 
alienigenarum  :  et  ipsi  propter 
meam  simulationem,  et  propter 
modicum  corruptibilis  vitse  tem- 
pus  decipiantur,  et  per  hoc 
maculam  atque  execrationem 
mesQ  senectuti  conquiram.  Nam, 
etsi  in  praesenti  tempore  suppli- 
ciis  hominum  eripiar,  sed  manum 
Omnipotentis  nee  vivus,  nee  de- 
functus  effugiam.  Quamobrem 
fortiter  vita  excedendo  senectute 
quidem  dignus  apparebo:  adoles- 
centibus autem  exemplum  forte 
relinquam,  si  prompto  animo,  ac 
fortiter  pro  gravissimis  ac  sanc- 
tissimis legibus  honesta  morte 
perfungar.  His  dictis,  confestim 
ad  supplicium  trahebatur.  Hi 
autem,  qui  eum  ducebant,  et 
paulo  ante  fuerant  mitiores,  in 
iram  conversi  sunt  propter  ser- 
mones  ab  eo  dictos,  quos  illi  per 
arrogantiam  prolatos  arbitraban- 
tur.  Sed,  cum  plagis  perimeretur, 
ingemuit,  et  dixit :  Domine,  qui 
habes  sanctam  scientiam,  mani- 
feste  tu  scis,  quia,  cum  a  morte 
possem  liberari,  duros  corporis 
sustineo  dolores  :  secundum  ani- 
mam  vero  propter  timorem  tuum 
libenter  haec  patior.  Et  iste 
quidem  hoc  modo  vita  decessit, 
non  solum  juvenibus,  sed  et  uni- 
versse  genti  memoriam  mortis 
suae  ad  exemplum  virtutis  et 
fortitudinis  derelinquens." 

The  23d,  24th,  25th,  26th,  and  27th  numbers  of  the  Exhor- 
tatio  ad  Martyrium  are  a  commentary  on  the  death  of  the 
mother  and  her  seven  sons,  as  recorded  in  the  second  book  of 
Maccab.,  seventh  Chapter,  and  he  concludes  by  saying:  "I 
believe  that  I  have  selected  these  things  as  most  useful  to  my 
scope  from  the  Scriptures,  that  we  may  see  how,  against  bit- 
terest tortures  and  heaviest  torments,  piety  and  the  love  of 


96 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


God,  mightier  than  any  other  love,  can  avail."  It  is  evident 
that  the  faith  for  which  the  martyrs  died  recognized  as  divine 
Scripture  the  deuterocanonical  books. 

Sap.  XV.  lo. 


"Cinis  est  enim  cor  ejus,  et 
terra  supervacua  spes  illius,  et 
lute  vilior  vita  ejus." 

Sap.  III.  6. 

"  Tamquam  aurum  in  fomace 
probavit  illos,  et  quasi  holo- 
causti  hostiam  accepit  illos,  et  in 
tempore  erit  rcspectus  illorum." 


Sap.  I.  4. 

"  Quoniam  in  malevolara  ani- 
mam  non  introibit  sapientia,  nee 
habitabit  in  corpore  subdito  pec- 
catis." 


Sap.  VII.  25—26. 

"  Vapor  est  enim  virtutis  Dei, 
et  emanatio  quaedamest  claritatis 
omnipotentis  Dei  sincera  :  et  ideo 
nihil  inquinatum  in  eam  incurrit; 
candor  est  enim  lucis  aeternae, 
et  speculum  sina  macula  Dei  ma- 
jestatis,  et  imago  bonitatis  illius." 

Sap.  I.  7. 

"  Quoniam  spiritus  Domini  re- 
plevit  orbem  terrarum  :  et  hoc, 
quod  continet  omnia,  scientiam 
habet  vocis." 


Orig,  Exhort,  ad  Martyr.  32. 

" —  idque  postquam  cognovi- 
mus  '  cinerem  esse  cor  idolis  ser- 
vientium,  vitamque  luto  turpio- 
rem.'  " 

Ibid.  35. 

'*  Quodsi  probatus  est  et  ille,  et 
qui  similes  illi  sunt ;  quos  '  tam- 
quam aurum  in  fomace  '  tormen- 
tis  et  quaestionibus  'probavit 
Dominus,  et  quasi  holocaust! 
hostiam  accepit.'" 

Orig.  Contra  Celsum,  Lib.  III. 
60. 

"  Quoniam  vero  docemus  '  sa- 
pientiam  in  malevolam  animam 
non  introituram,  nee  habitatu- 
ram  in  corpore  subdito  pecca- 
tis.'  " 

Orig.  Contra  Celsum,  Lib.  III. 
72. 

" —  aut  quomodo  ilium  divina 
Scriptura  definit :  '  vapor  divinae 
potestatis,  limpida  omnipotentis 
ejus  gloriae  efHuentia,  splendor 
lucis  aeternae,  speculum  sine  ma- 
cula Dei  majestatis,  et  imago 
bonitatis  illius.' " 

Orig. Contra  Celsum,  Lib.  IV.  5. 

"  —  nescit :  *  Spiritum  Do- 
mini replere  orbem  terrarum,  et 
hoc  quod  continet  omnia  scien- 
tiam habere  vocis.' " 


Sap.  XI.  25. 

"  Diligis  enim  omnia  quae 
sunt,  et  nihil  odisti  eorum  quae 
fecisti :  nee  enim  odiens  aliquid 
constituisti,  aut  fecisti." 


Ibid.  18. 

"  Legimus  ac  novimus :  'Deum 
diligere  omnia  quae  sunt,  et  nihil 
odisse  eorum  quae  fecit ;  nihil 
enim  constiturum  fuisse  quod 
odisset.' " 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


97 


Eccli.  XVIIL  12. 

"  —  misericordia  autem  Dei 
super  omnem  camera." 

Sap.  XII.  I. 

"  O  quam  bonus,  et  suavis  est, 
Domine,  spiritus  tuus  in  omni- 
bus !  " 

Eccli.  XXXIX.  26. 

"  Non  est  dicere :  Quid  est 
hoc,  aut  quid  est  istud  ?  omnia 
enim  in  tempore  suo  quaeren- 
tur." 


Tob.  XII.  7. 

"  Etenim  sacramentum  regis 
abscondere  bonum  est  :  opera 
autem  Dei  revelare  et  confiteri 
honorificum  est." 


Sap.  X.  5. 

"  Haec  et  in  consensu  nequi- 
tiae,  cum  se  nationes  contulissent, 
scivit  justum,  et  conservavit  sine 
querela  Deo,  et  in  filii  misericor- 
dia fortem  custodivit." 

Tob.  XII.  7. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Sap.  I.  4. 

" —  quoniam  in  malevolam 
animam  non  introibit  sapientia, 
nee  habitabit  in  corpore  subdito 
peccatis." 

Eccli.  XXI.  21. 

"  Tamquam    doraus    extermi- 
nata,    sic    fatuo    sapientia :      et 
scientia    insensati     inenarrabilia 
verba." 
G 


Ibid. 

" — et  misericordiam  Domini 
esse  super  omnem  camera." 

Ibid.  37. 

"  —  de  quo  dictum  est:  'In- 
corruptibilis  autem  tuus  Spiritus 
est  in  omnibus.'" 

Ibid  75. 

"  Ne  dixeris  :  quid  hoc  ?  aut : 
quorsum  hoc  ?  omnia  enim  ad 
illorum  usum  creata  sunt.  Et  ne 
dixeris  :  quid  istud  ?  aut  quor- 
sum istud  ?  omnia  enim  in  tem- 
pore suo  quaerentur." 

Orig.  Contra  Celsum,Lib.V.  19. 

" '  Queraadmodum,  et  apud 
Tobiam  legitur  :  '  Sacraraentura 
regis  bonum  est  abscondere  ;  sed 

opera  Dei  sincere  revelare 

pulchrum  est.' " 

Ibid.  29. 

"  Sic  enim  ibi  de  sapientia  : 
*  Haec  et  in  consensu  nequitiae, 
cum  gentes  confusae  fuissent, 
scivit  justum,  et  conservavit  sine 
querela  Deo,  et  in  filii  misericor- 
dia fortem  custodivit.'  " 


Ibid. 


(Already  quoted.) 

Ibid. 

" —  de  qua  pulchre  scriptum 
est :  '  In  malevolam  animam  non 
introibit  sapientia,  nee  habitabit 
in  corpore  subdito  peccatis.'  " 

Orig. Contra  Celsum,Lib.VI.  7. 

"  Modo  Jesu  Sirach  filius,  qui 
librum,  Sapientiam  (Sirach)  in- 
scriptura,  conscripsit :  '  Scientia 
stulti,  sermones  inextricabiles.' " 


98 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


Sap.  IX.  6. 

"  Nam  et  si  quis  erit  consum- 
matus  inter  filios  hominum,  si  ab 
illo  abfuerit  sapientia  tua,  in  ni- 
hilum  computabitur." 

Sap.  VII.  26. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Sap.  XVII.  I. 

"  Magna  sunt  enim  judicia  tua 
Domine,  et  inenarrabilia  verba 
tua  :  propter  hoc  indisciplinatae 
animae  erraverunt," 

Sap.  I.  5. 

"  Spiritus  enim  sanctus  discip- 
linae  effugiet  fictum,  et  auferet 
se  a  cogitationibus,  quae  sunt 
sine  intellectu,  et  corripietur  a 
superveniente  iniquitate." 

Eccli.  XXI.  21. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Ibid.  13. 

"  Nam  et  si  quis  erit  consum- 
matus  inter  filios  hominum,  si  ab 
illo  abfuerit  sapientia,  quae  a  te 
est,  in  nihilum  computabitur." 

Ibid  63. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Ibid.  79. 

"Verum  nihil  mirandum  est 
quoniam  :  '  Dei  judicia  magna 
sunt,  et  explicatu  ardua;  indis- 
ciplinatas  animas,'  adeoque  Cel- 
sum,  'errare.'" 

Contra  Celsum,   Lib.  VIII.   8. 

"  Spiritus  enim  sanctus  dis- 
ciplinae  effugiet  fictum,  et  auferet 
se  a  cogitationibus  quae  sunt 
sine  intellectu." 

Ibib.  12. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Sap.  XII.  1—2. 

"  O  quam  bonus,  et  suavis  est, 
Domine,  spiritus  tuus  in  omnibus! 
Ideoque  eos,  qui  exerrant,  parti- 
bus  corripis  :  et  de  quibus  pec- 
cant, admones  et  alloqueris  :  ut 
relicta  malitia,  credant  in  te,  Do- 
mine." 

Sap.  VII.  25—26. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Sap.  XVII.  I. 

I.  Maccab.  IX.  55;  II.  Maccab. 
III.  24;  IX.  5. 


Ibid.  51. 

"  Incorruptibilis  spiritus  tuus 
est  in  omnibus,  quapropter  de- 
linquentes  paulatim  arguit  Deus." 


Orig,    Contra     Celsum,     Lib. 
VIIL  14. 

(Already  quoted.) 
Ibid,  32. 

Ibid.  46. 

"  —  et  alii  qui,  Judaeorum  cul- 
tum  violare  in  templo  ausi  fuerint, 
referunt  Machabaeorum  libri." 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


99 


Eccli.  X.  23. 

"  Semen  hominum  honorabitur 
hoc,  quod  timet  Deum  :  semen 
autem  hoc  exhonorabitur,  quod 
praeterit  mandata  Domini." 

Eccli.  X.  4. 

"In  manu  Dei  potestas  terrae: 
et  utilem  rectorem  suscitabit  in 
tempus  super  illam." 

Sap.  I.  13. 

"  Quoniam  Deus  mortem  non 
fecit,  nee  laetatur  in  perditione 
vivorum." 

Sap.  VIII.  2. 

"  Hanc  amavi,  et  exquisivi  a 
juventute  mea,  et  quaesivi  spon- 
sam  mihi  earn  assumere,  et  ama- 
tor  factus  sum  formae  illius." 

Sap.  VIII.  2. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Eccli.  XXII.  24. 

"  Pungens  oculum  deducit  la- 
crymas  :  et  qui  pungit  cor,  pro- 
fert  sensum." 

Sap.  II.  20. 

"  Morte  turpissima  condem- 
nemus  eum  :  erit  enim  ei  respec- 
tus  ex  sermonibus  illius." 

Baruch  III.  9. 

"  Audi,  Israel,  mandata  vitae  : 
auribus  percipe,  ut  scias  pruden- 
tiam." 

Eccli.  VII.  40. 

"In  omnibus  operibus  tuis 
memorare  novissima  tua,  et  in 
aeternum  non  peccabis." 


Ibid.  50. 

"  Hoc  docet  divina  Scriptura  : 
*  Ecquod  semen  in  honore  ? 
semen  hominis;  ecquod  semen 
in  contemptu?  semen  hominis.'  " 

Ibid.  68. 

"  —  quique  utilem  rectorem 
suscitat  in  tempus  super  terram." 

Orig.  Selecta  in  Genesim. 

"  Deus  enim  mortem  non  fecit, 
nee  delectatur  in  perditione  vi- 
vorum." 

Orig.  Homilia  VI.  in  Gene- 
sim, I. 

" —  sicut  et  ille  sapiens  qui 
dicebat  de  sapientia:  '  Hanc  quae- 
sivi adducere  mihi  sponsam.' " 

Homilia  XI.  in  Genesim,  i. 

"Sicut  et  ille  qui  dicebat  de 
sapientia  :  *  Hanc  ego  cogitavi 
uxorem  adducere  mihi.'  " 

"  Orig.  in  Exodum,  Homilia 
IV.  5. 

"  Pro  illo  vero  alia  Scriptura 
dicit :  '  Punge  oculum,  et  produ- 
cit  lacrymam  ;  punge  cor,  et 
producit  sensum.'  " 

Horn.  VI.  in  Exodum,  i. 

"  De  quo  etiam  Propheta  prae- 
dixerat :  *  Morte  turpissima  con- 
demnemus  eum.' " 

Hom.  VII.  in  Exod.  2. 

"  Sicut  et  alibi  (Scriptura) 
dicit ;  *  Audi,  Israel,  mandata 
vitae.'" 

Hom.  IX.  in  Exod.  4. 

"  Memor  esto  novissimorum 
tuorum,  et  non  peccabis." 


100 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


Dan.  XIII.  22 — 23. 

"  Ingemuit  Susanna,  et  ait  : 
Angustiae  sunt  mihi  undique  :  si 
enim  hoc  egero,  mors  mihi  est : 
si  autem  non  egero,  non  effugiam 
manus  vestras.  Sed  melius  est 
mihi  absque  opere  incidere  in 
manus  vestras,  quam  peccare  in 
conspectu  Domini." 


Sap.  I.  7. 

"  Quoniam  spiritus  Domini  re- 
plevit  orbem  terrarum  :  et  hoc, 
quod  continet  omnia,  scientiam 
habet  vocis." 

Sap.  VIII.  20. 

"  Et  cum  essem  magis  bonus, 
veni  ad  corpus  incoinquinatum." 


Eccli.  XXVIII.  22. 

"  Multi  ceciderunt  in  ore  gladii, 
sed  non  sic  quasi  qui  interierunt 
per  linguam  suam." 

Sap.  VII.  20. 

"  —  naturas  animalium,  et  iras 
bestiarum,  vim  ventorum,  et  cogi- 
tationes  hominum,  et  virtutes  ra- 
dicum." 


Horn.  I.  in  Leviticum,  i. 

"But  it  behooves  us  to  use 
against  the  impious  presbyters 
the  words  of  the  blessed  SusannaCy 
which  they  indeed  repudiating, 
have  cut  off  from  the  catalogue  of 
divine  Scripture  the  history  of 
Susannae.  But  we  receive  it,  and 
appositely  adduce  it  against 
them,  saying  :  *  I  am  straitened 
on  every  side  :  for  if  I  do  this 
thing  (follow  the  letter  of  the 
Law)  it  is  death  to  me  ;  and  if  I 
do  it  not,  I  shall  not  escape  your 
hands.  But  it  is  better  for  me 
to  fall  into  your  hands  without 
doing  it  than  to  sin  in  the  sight 
of  the  Lord.'  " 

Hom.  V.  in  Leviticum,  2. 

"  Et  iterum  alibi  :  '  Spiritus 
enim  Domini  replevit  orbem  ter- 
rarum.' " 


Hom.  XII.  in  Levit.  4. 

"  Ipse  (Jesus)  enim  erat  qui  et 
dudum  per  Salomonem  dixerat : 
*  Magis  autem  cum  essem  bonus, 
veni  ad  corpus  incoinquina- 
tum.' " 

Orig.   Hom.  VIII.  in    Nume- 
ros,  I. 

"  Non  legisti  ?  '  Dicunt  quia 
vulnerant  gladii  sed  non  ita  ut 
lingua  ?'  " 

Hom.  XII.  in  Numeros,  i. 

** —  de  quorum  scientia  dice- 
bat  ille  qui  repletus  est  sapientia 
Dei  :  '  Ipse  enim  .  mihi  dedit 
eorum  quae  sunt  scientiam  veram, 
ut  scirem  substantiam  mundi  et 
elementorum  virtutem,  initium 
et  finem  et  medietatem  tempo- 
rum,     vicissitudinem,    permuta- 


THE  CANON   OF  THE  CHURCH. 


101 


Sap,  VII.  lo. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Sap.  VII.  22 — 23, 

" —  est  enim  in  ilia  spiritus 
intelligentiae,  sanctus,  unicus, 
multiplex,  subtilis,  disertus,  mo- 
bilis,  incoinquinatus,  certus,  sua- 
vis,  amans  bonum,  acutus,  quem 
nihil  vetat,  benefaciens,  humanus, 
benignus,  stabilis,  certus,  secu- 
rus,  omnem  habens  virtutem, 
omnia  prospiciens,  et  qui  capiat 
omnes  spiritus,  intelligibilis 
mundus,  subtilis." 

Eccli.  I.  I. 

"  Omnis  sapientia  a  Domino 
Deo  est,  et  cum  illo  fuit  semper, 
et  est  ante  aevum." 


Eccli.  XIX.  19. 

"  Et  non  est  sapientia  nequi- 
tiae  disciplina  :  et  non  est  cogi- 
tatus  peccatorum  prudentia." 

Sap.  III.  16. 

"  Filii  autem  adulterorum  in 
inconsummatione  erunt,  et  ab 
iniquo  thoro  semen  extermina- 
bitur." 

Eccli.  XVI.  5. 

"  Ab  uno  sensato  inhabitabitur 
patria,  tribus  impiorum  desere- 
tur." 


tiones  et  commutationes  tempo- 
rum,  anni  circulos,  et  astrorum 
positiones,  naturas  animalium,  et 
iras  bestiarum,  spirituum  violen- 
tias  et  cogitationes  hominum, 
differentias  virgultorum,  et  vir- 
tutes  radicum.'  " 


Ibid. 


(Already  quoted.) 


Orig.      Hom. 
XVII.  6. 


in      Numeros, 


"  —  quia  et  spiritus  sapientiae, 
qui  intelligibilis  et  sanctus  et 
unicus  et  multiplex  dicitur,  sim- 
iliter et  subtilis  esse  perhibetur." 


Hom.  XVIII.  in  Numeros,  3. 

"In  libro,  qui  apud  nos  quidem 
inter  Salomonis  volumina  haberi 
solet,  et  Ecclesiasticus  dici,  apud 
Graecos  vero  Sapientia  Jesu  filii 
Sirach  appellatur,  scriptum  est : 

*  Omnis  sapientia  a  Deo  est.'  " 

Ibid. 

"  Non  est  enim  sapientia  ma- 
litiae  disciplina." 

Hom.  in  Numeros  XX.  2. 

"  —  de  quibus  scriptum  est  : 

*  Filii  autem  adulterorum  imper- 
fecti  erunt,  et  ex  iniquo  concu- 
bitu  semen  exterminabitur.' " 

Hom.  XXI.  in  Num.  2. 

"  Denique  et  scriptum  est : 
'Per  unum  sapientem  inhabita- 
bitur civitas ;  tribus  autem  ini- 
quorum  desolabitur.' " 


102 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   CHURCH. 


Sap.  IX.  15. 

"  Corpus  enim,  quod  corrum- 
pitur,  aggravat  animam,  et  ter- 
rena  inhabitatio  deprimit  sensum 
multa  cogitantem." 

Eccli.  XIV.  23. 

"  Qui  excogitat  vias  illius  in 
corde  suo,  et  in  absconditis  suis 
intelligens,  vadens  post  illam 
quasi  investigator,  et  in  viis  illius 
consistens — ." 

Eccli.  II.  I. 

"  Fili,  accedens  ad  servitutem 
Dei,  sta  in  justitia,  et  timore,  et 
praepara  animam  tuam  ad  tenta- 
tionem." 

Dan.  XIII.  56. 

"  Et,  amoto  eo,  jussit  venire 
alium,  et  dixit  ei :  Semen  Cha- 
naan,  et  non  Juda,  species  de- 
cepit  te,  et  concupiscentia  sub- 
vertit  cor  tuum — ." 

Eccli.  III.  20. 

"  Quanto  magnus  es,  humilia 
te  in  omnibus,  et  coram  Deo  in- 
venies  gratiam — ." 

Ibid.  XXXII.  I. 

"  Rectorem  te  posuerunt  ?  noli 
extoUi :  esto  in  illis  quasi  unus 
ex  ipsis." 

Eccli.  X.  15. 

"  —  quoniam  ab  eo,  qui  fecit 
ilium,  recessit  cor  ejus  ;  quoniam 
initium  omnis  peccati  est  super- 
bia — ." 

Eccli.  XXV.  3—4. 

"Tres  species  odivit  anima 
mea,  et  aggravor  valde  animae  il- 
lorum  :  pauperem  superbum  : 
divitem  mendacem  :  senem 
fatuum  et  insensatum." 


Horn.  XXIII.  in  Num.  11. 

"  '  Corpus  enim  corruptibile,' 
ut  ait  ille  sapientissimus,  '  aggra- 
vat animam,  et  deprimit  sensum 
multa  cogitantem.* " 

Horn.  XXVIII.  in  Num.  i. 

"  Sed  et  ego  qui  lego  de  sapi- 
entia  scriptum  :  '  Exi  post  eam 
sicut  investigator—^.'  " 


Orig.  Hom.  XI.  in  Jehoshua,  2. 

"  Sed  et  Salomon  similia  dicit : 
*  Fili,'  inquit,  '  accedens  ad  ser- 
vitutem Domini,  praepara  ani- 
mam tuam  ad  tentationem.' " 

Hom.  XXII.  in  Jehosua,  6. 

" — Cui  dicitur  a  Propheta, 
'  Semen  Chanaan  et  non  Juda, 
species  seduxit  te.'  " 


Hom.  XXIV.  in  Jehoshua,  2. 

" — quod  dicitur:  'Quanto  mag- 
nus es  tanto  magis  humilia  te,  et 
ante  Dominum  in venies  gratiam,' 
et  iterum  quod  scriptum  est:  'Si 
te  ducem  ordinaverint,  ne  extol- 
laris,  sed  esto  inter  eos  quasi 
unus  ex  ipsis.'  " 

Orig.  Hom.  III.  in  Judic  i. 

" — quia  sicut  Scriptura  dicit : 
'  Initium  discedendi  a  Domino, 
superbia — .'  " 

0 

Ibid. 

"  Nihil  invenies  tam  foedum 
neque  execrabile,  sicut  Scrip- 
tura dicit,  quam  '  pauperem  su- 
perbum et  divitem  mendacem.' " 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   CHURCH. 


103 


Judith  XIII. 


Eccli.  XXVII.  12. 

"  Homo  sanctus  in  sapientia 
manet  sicut  sol :  nam  stultus 
sicut  luna  mutatur." 

Eccli.  III.   22. 

"  Altiora  te  ne  quaesieris,  et 
fortiora  te  ne  scrutatus  fueris  : 
sed  quae  praecepit  tibi  Deus,  ilia 
cogita  semper,  et  in  pluribus 
operibus  ejus  ne  fueris  curiosus." 

Eccli.  I.  II. 

"  Timor  Domini  gloria,  et  glo- 
riatio,  et  laetitia,  et  corona  ex- 
ultationis." 


Sap.  V.  i8 — 21. 

"  Accipiet  armaturam  zelus 
illius,  et  armabit  creaturam  ad 
ultionem  inimicorum.  Induct 
pro  thorace  justitiam,  et  accipiet 
pro  galea  judicium  certum  ;  su- 
met  scutum  inexpugnabile  aequi- 
tatem  :  acuet  autem  duram  iram 
in  lanceam,  et  pugnabit  cum  illo 
orbis  terrarum  contra  insensa- 
tos." 

Dan.  XIII.  45  et  seqq. 
"  Cumque  duceretur  ad   mor- 
tem, suscitavit  Dominus  spiritum 


Hom.  IX.  in  Judic.  i. 

"  Quid  ego  illam  magnificam 
et  omnium  feminarum  nobilis- 
simam  memorem,  Judith,  quae 
jam  perditis  pene  rebus,  non  du- 
bitavit  sola  succurrere,  seseque 
suumque  caput  immanissimi 
Holophernis  neci  sola  subjicere, 
et  processit  ad  bellum  non  in 
armis,  neque  in  equis  bellicis  aut 
in  subsidiis  militaribus  freta,  sed 
in  virtute  animi ;  et  confidentia 
fidei,  consilio  simul  et  audacia 
hostem  perimit." 

Orig.  Hom.  I.  in  Reg.  4. 

" — quia  et  secundum  Scrip- 
turas  :  '  insipiens  sicut  luna  mu- 
tatur.' " 

Hom.  II.  in  Reg.  4. 

"  Nam  et  Salomon  dicit :  *  Al- 
tiora te  ne  quaesieris,  et  fortiora 
te  ne  scrutere,  sed  de  quibus  tibi 
praeceptum  est,  haec  intellige.'  " 

Orig.  Selecta  in  Ps.  XXI.  32. 

"  Generatio  autem  Sapientiae 
est  secundum  Salomonem  :  *  ti- 
mer Domini,  divitiae,  gloria  ac 
vita.' " 

Selecta  in  Ps.  XXXIV.  2. 

"  Accipiet  armaturam  zelum  il- 
lius, et  armabit  creaturam  ad 
ultionem  inimicorum.  Induet 
pro  thorace  justitiam,  et  accipiet 
pro  galea  judicium  certum,  sumet 
scutum  inexpugnabile  aequita- 
tem,  acuet  autem  duram  iram  in 
lanceam." 


Hom.  IV.  in  Ps.  XXXVI.  2. 
"  Respice    beatum    Danielem, 
qui   a   puero  et  prophetiae  gra- 


104 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


sanctum    pueri    junioris,    cujus 
nomen  Daniel." 

Sap.  V.  4. 

"  Nos  insensati  vitam  illorum 
aestimabamus  insaniam,  et  finem 
illorum  sine  honore." 

Esther  XIV.  11. 

"Ne  tradas,  Domine,  sceptrum 
tuum  his,  qui  non  sunt,  ne  ride- 
ant  ad  ruinam  nostram  :  sed  con- 
verte  consilium  eorum  super  eos, 
et  eum,  qui  in  nos  coepit  saevire, 
disperde." 

Eccli.  VIII.  6. 

"  Ne  despicias  hominem  aver- 
tentem  se  a  peccato,  neque  im- 
properes  ei ;  memento  quoniam 
omnes  in  correptione  sumus." 

Eccli.  XXVIII.  28—29. 

"  Sepi  aures  tuas  spinis,  lin- 
guam  nequam  noli  audire,  et  ori 
tuo  facito  ostia,  et  seras.  Aurum 
tuum  et  argentum  tuum  confla, 
et  verbis  tuis  facito  stateram,  et 
frenos  ori  tuo  rectos — ." 

Eccli.  XXIII.  2. 

"Quis  superponet  in  cogitatu 
meo  flagella,  et  in  corde  meo 
doctrinam  sapientiae,  ut  ignora- 
tionibus  eorum  non  parcant  mihi, 
et  non  appareant  delicta  eorum?" 


Eccli.  XXI.  29. 

"  In  ore  fatuorum  cor  illorum  : 
et  in  corde  sapientium  os  illo- 
rum." 


tiam  meruit,  et  iniquos  arguens 
presbyteros,  puer  coronam  jus- 
titiae  et  castitatis  obtinuit." 

Hom.  V.  in  Ps.  XXXVI.  5. 

"  — ita  ut  illi  qui  in  poenis 
sunt,  videntes  eos  in  gloria  di- 
cent :  Nos  stulti  vitam  eorum 
putabamus  insaniam." 

Ibid. 

"  Et  in  libro  Esther  dicitur  : 
'  Non  tradas,  Domine,  sceptrum 
tuum  his  qui  non  sunt.'  " 


Hom.  II.  in  Ps.  XXXVII.   i. 

"  — nee  memores  Scripturae 
sunt  divinae  dicentis  :  *  Noli 
improperare  homini  convertenti 
se  a  peccato,  sed  memor  esto 
quoniam  omnes  sumus  in  culpis."' 

Hom.  I.  in  Ps.  XXXVIII.  3. 

"  Alibi  quidem  scriptum  est : 
'Vide,  circumduc  sepem  spina- 
rum  circa  possessionem  tuam.' 
Et  iterum  :  *  Pecuniam  tuam  et 
aurum  tuum  alliga,  et  ori  tuo 
facito  ostium  et  seram,  et  verbis 
tuis,  jugum  et  stateram.'  " 

Hom.  II.  in  Ps.  XXXVIII.  7. 

"  Sed  novi  ego  et  alia  flagella 
quibus  vehementius  cruciamur, 
ilia  scilicet  quae  per  prophetam 
describit  sapientia  (prophetam 
enim  eum  dico):  '  Quis  dabit  in 
cogitatu  meo  correptionem  sa- 
pientiae, ut  ignorationibus  meis 
quae  feci  non  parcatur,  et  pec- 
cata  mea  non  praetereantur?'  " 

Orig.  Selecta  in  Ps.  LI.  Vers.  4. 
" —  in  ore  stultorum  cor  eorum 
est." 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


105 


Eccli.  XV.  9. 

'*  Non  est  speciosa  laus  in  ore 
peccatoris — ." 

Sap.  I.  4. 

" —  quoniam  in  malevolam  ani- 
mam  non  introibit  sapientia,  nee 
habitabit  in  corpore  subdito  pec- 
catis." 


Sap.  I.  4. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Eccli.  XXVII.  12. 

"  Homo  sanctus  in  sapientia 
manet  sicut  sol  :  nam  stultus 
sicut  luna  mutatur. 

Baruch  III.  38. 

"  Post  haec  in  terris  visus  est, 
et  cum  hominibus  conversatus 
est." 

Eccli.  XV.  g. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Sap.  VII.  25. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Sap.  IV.  13. 

"Consummatus  in  brevi,  ex- 
plevit  tempora  multa — ." 


Sap.  VIII.  2. 

"  Hanc  amavi,  et  exquisivi  a 
juventute  mea,  et  quaesivi  spon- 
sam  mihi  earn  assumere,  et  ama- 
tor  f actus  sum  formae  illius." 

Eccli.  I.  S3- 

**Fili,  concupiscens  sapientiam, 
conserva  justitiam  ?  et  Deus  prae- 
bebit  illam  tibi. 


Selecta  in  Ps.  LXV.  Vers.  2. 
"  —  quia  non  est  speciosa  laus 
in  ore  peccatoris." 

Selecta   in     Ps.     LXXXVIII. 
Vers.  32. 

"  Qui  non  custodit  mandata 
Dei  desivit  esse  thronus  Dei, 
nam:  *In  malevolam  animam, 
non  introibit  sapientia,  neque 
habitabit  in  corpore  subdito  pec- 
catis  '  " 

Selecta  in  Ps.  CXVIII.  Vers. 
155- 

(Already  quoted.) 

Selecta  in  Ps.  CXX.  Vers.  6. 

" —  Stultus  ut  luna  mutatur." 


Selecta  in  Ps.  CXXV.  Vers.  2. 

"  Post  haec  enim  in  terra  visus 
est,  et  cum  hominibus  conversa- 
tus est." 

Selecta  in  CXLIX.  Vers.  i. 
(Already  quoted.) 

Orig.  Fragmenta  in  Prov.  I.  2. 
(Already  many  times  quoted.) 
Ibid.  Cap.  XXX. 

" —  siquidem  *in  brevi  con- 
summatus,  explevit  tempora  mul- 
ta.' " 

Orig.  Prologus  in  Canticum 
Cantic. 

"  Sed  et  in  eo  libello  qui  dici- 
tur  Sapientia  Salomonis  ita  scrip- 
turn  est  de  ipsa  sapientia  :  *  Ama- 
tor  factus  sum  decoris  ejus.'  " 

Ibid. 

" — et  intelligere  illud  quod 
scriptum  est :  '  Concupisti  sa- 
pientiam ?  serva  mandata,  et  Do- 
minus  dabit  earn  tibi.'  " 


106 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


Sap.  XI.  27— XII.  I. 

"  Parcis  autem  omnibus  :  quo- 
niam  tua  sunt,  Domine,  qui  amas 
animas.  O  quam  bonus,  et  sua- 
vis  est,  Domine,  spiritus  tuus  in 
omnibus." 

Sap.  VII.  17 — 20. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Eccli.  XXVIII.  29. 

"  Aurum  tuum  et  argentum 
tuum  confla,  et  verbis  tuis  facito 
stateram,  et  frenos  ori  tuo  rec- 
tos— ." 

Eccli.  IV.  33. 

**  Pro  justitia  agonizare  pro 
anima  tua,  et  usque  ad  mortem 
certa  pro  justitia,  et  Deus  ex- 
pugnabit  pro  te  inimicos  tuos." 

Sap.  VII.  22. 

" — est  enim  in  ilia  spiritus  in- 
telligentiae,  sanctus,  unicus,  mul- 
tiplex, subtilis,  disertus,  mobi- 
lis— ." 


Orig.  in  Cant.  Cantig.  Lib.  III. 
Vers.  4. 

" —  quamvis  verum  sit  ut  dici- 
tur  ad  eum  :  '  Parcis  autem  om- 
nibus, quia  omnia  tua  sunt,  Do- 
mine, amator  animarum.  Spi- 
ritus enim  incorruptionis  est  in 
omnibus.' " 

Ibid.  Vers.  9. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Ibid.  Cap.  VII.  Vers.  8. 

" — juxta  illud  :  '  Ori  tuo  fac 
ostium,  et  vectem,  et  verbis  tuis 
fac  modum  et  stateram.'  " 

Ibid.  Cap.  VIII.  6. 
**  Et  usque  ad   mortem   certa 
pro  justitia." 


Hom.  VI.  in  Isaiam,  5. 

"Dicitur  enim  de  S.  Spiritu,  qui 
est  secundum  sapientiam,  quia 
sit  multifarius,    tenuis,  mobilis." 


Sap.  I.  13 — 14,  et  II.  24. 

"  Quoniam  Deus  mortem  non 
fecit,  nee  laetatur  in  perditione 
vivorum.  Creavit  enim,  ut  es- 
sent  omnia :  et  sanabiles  fecit 
nation es  orbis  terrarum  :  et  non 
est  in  illis  medicamentum  exter- 
minii,  nee  inferorum  regnum  in 
terra.  Invidia  autem  diaboli  mors 
introivit  in  orbem  terrarum — ." 


Eccli.  XXI.  18. 

"  Verbum  sapiens  quodcumque 
audierit  scius  laudabit,  et  ad  se 
adjiciet — ." 


Hom.  II.  in  Jeremiam  I. 

"'Deus  mortem  non  fecit, 
neque  delectatur  in  perditione 
viventium.  Creavit  enim  ut 
essent  omnia,  et  salutares  gene- 
rationes  mundi,  nee  est  in  eis 
venenum  mortis,  neque  inferni 
regnum  super  terram.'  Deinde 
paululum  ultra  procedens  invenio 
unde  sit  mors  :  '  Invidia  autem 
diaboli,  mors  intravit  in  orbem 
terrarum.'  " 

Hom.  VI.  in  Jerem.  i. 

"Quoniam  vero:  'Verbum 
sapiens  si  audierit  scius,  laudabit, 
et  ad  illud  adjiciet.'  " 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


107 


Eccli.  XXIII.  2. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Baruch  III.  9 — 13. 

"  Audi,  Israel,  mandata  vitae  : 
auribus  percipe,  ut  scias  pruden- 
tiam.  Quid  est,  Israel,  quod  in 
terra  inimicorum  es  ?  inveterasti 
in  terra  aliena,  coinquinatus  es 
cum  mortuis  :  deputatus  es  cum 
descendentibus  in  infernum.  De- 
reliquisti  fontem  sapientiae  ;  nam 
si  in  via  Dei  ambulasses,  habi- 
tasses  utique  in  pace  sempi- 
terna." 

Sap.  III.  II, 

"  Sapientiam  enim,  et  discipli- 
nam  qui  abjicit,  infelix  est :  et 
vacua  est  spes  illorum,  et  labores 
sine  fructu,  et  inutilia  opera 
eorum." 

Eccli.  XXXI.  10. 

"  Qui  probatus  est  in  illo,  et 
perfectus  est,  erit  illi  gloria  aeter- 
na  :  qui  potuit  transgredi,  et  non 
est  transgressus  :  facere  mala,  et 
non  fecit — ." 

Baruch  III.  10 — 11. 

"Quid  est,  Israel,  quod  in  terra 
inimicorum  es  ?  inveterasti  in 
terra  aliena,  coinquinatus  es  cum 
mortuis:  deputatus  es  cum  de- 
scendentibus in  infernum." 

Sap.  III.  I. 

"  Justorum  autem  animae  in 
manu  Dei  sunt,  et  non  tanget 
illos  tormentum  mortis." 

Eccli.  I.  2. 

"Arenara  maris,  et  pluviae 
guttas,  et  dies  saeculi  quis  dinu- 
meravit  ?  Altitudinem  caeli,  et 
latitudinem  terrae,  et  profundum 
abyssi  quis  dimensus  est  ?" 


Ibid.  2. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Horn.  VII.  in  Jerem.  3. 

" — et  abire  in  terram  de  qua 
scriptum  est :  *  Audi,  Israel, 
quid  est  quod  in  terra  inimico- 
rum es  ?  Computatus  es  cum 
descendentibus  in  infernum  ;  de- 
reiiquisti  fontem  vitae,Dominum: 
in  via  Dei  si  ambulasses,  habi- 
tasses  utique  in  pace  in  saecu- 
lum.'  " 


Hom.  VIII.  in  Jerem.  i. 

"  '  Sapientiam  autem  et  dis- 
ciplinam  qui  abjicit,  infelix  est, 
et  vana  spes  ejus,  et  labores  ejus 
insensati,  et  inutilia  opera  ejus,' 
ait  Sapientia,  quae  dicitur  Salo- 
monis." 

Selecta  in  Jerem.  Cap.  II.  32. 
"Gloria    enim   aeterna   super 
caput  justorum  " 


Ibid.  Cap.  XXXI.  16. 

"  Scriptum  est  in  Baruch  : 
*  Quid  est  quod  in  terra  inimi- 
corum es,  et  coinquinatus  es  cum 
mortuis  ?' " 

Ibid.  Cap.  XLV.  5. 
"  —  Nam  'justorum  animae  in 
manu  Dei  sunt.'  " 

Orig.  Hom,  IV.  in  Ezechiel,  2. 

"Arenam  maris  et  pluviae  stil- 
las  et  dies  saeculi,  quis  dinumer- 
abit  ?  Altitudinem  coeli  et  lati- 
tudinem terrae  et  profundum 
Sapientiae,  quis  investigabit  ?" 


108 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


Eccli.  VII.  6. 

"  Noli  quaerere  fieri  judex, 
nisi  valeas  virtute  irrurapere  ini- 
quitates  :  ne  forte  extimescas 
faciem  potentis,  et  ponas  scan- 
dalum  in  aequitate  tua." 


Dan.  XIIL  56. 

"  Et,  amoto  eo,  jussit  venire 
alium,  et  dixit  ei :  Semen  Cha- 
naan,  et  non  Juda,  species  de- 
cepit  te,  et  concupiscentia  sub- 
vertit  cor  tuum — ," 

Eccli.  X.  9 — 10. 

"  Avaro  autera  nihil  est  sceles- 
tius.  Quid  superbit  terra  et 
cinis  ?  Nihil  est  iniquius  quam 
amare  pecuniara ;  hie  enim  et 
animam  suam  venalem  habet ; 
quoniam  in  vita  sua  projecit  in- 
tima  sua." 

Eccli.  III.  20. 

"  Quanto  magnus  es,  humilia 
te  in  omnibus,  et  coram  Deo  in- 
venies  gratiam — ." 

Sap.  VI.  7. 

"  Exiguo  enim  conceditur  mi- 
sericordia:  potentes  autemjpoten- 
ter  tormenta  patientur." 

Eccli.  XVIII.  30. 

*'  Post  concupiscentias  tuas 
non  eas,  et  a  voluntate  tua  aver- 
tere." 

Eccli.  XXVII.  12. 

"  Homo  sanctus  in  sapientia 
manet  sicut  sol  :  nam  stultus 
sicut  luna  mutatur." 


Hom.  V.  in  Ezech.  4. 

"  —  et  ante  oculos  mihi  propo- 
nens  ilium  judicii  ordinem  qui 
in  Scripturis  continetur,  recordor 
dicti  illius  :  '  Pondus  ultra  te  ne 
leves.'  Sed  et  illud  :  '  Noli  quae- 
rere fieri  judex,  ne  non  valeas 
auferre  iniquitates.'  " 

Hom.  VI.  in  Ezech.  3. 

"Saepe  miratus  sum  id  quod 
dictum  est  a  Daniel  ad  presby- 
terum  peccatorem,  cui  pro  pec- 
cato  nomen  imponens:  'Semen,' 
inquit  *  Chanaan  et  non  Juda.'  " 

Hom.  IX.  in  Ezech.  2. 

"  Quid  enim  ait  Scriptura  ? 
*  Quid  superbit  terra  et  cinis  ?' 
et  :  *  In  vita  ejus  projecit  intera- 
nea  ejus.' " 


Ibid. 

" — dicente  Scriptura:  'Quanto 
magnus  fuerit,  tanto  humilia  te 
ipsum.*  " 

Hom.  X.  in  Ezech.  2. 

"  Justum  est  quippe  judicium 
Dei,  et  'potentes  potenter  tor- 
menta patiuntur.'  " 

Orig.  Comment,  in  Math.  Tom. 

XII.  22. 
"  Post     concupiscentias     tuas 
non  eas." 

Ibid.  Tom.  XIII.  4. 

"  Nobis proderit  is  qui  in 

Sapientia  de  justi  quidem  ae- 
quabilitate  et  constantia  ait : 
*  Narratio  pii  semper  est  sapien- 
tia ....  stultus  autem  sicut  luna 
mutatur.' " 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


109 


Esther  XIV.  2. 

"  Cumque  deposuisset  vestes 
regias,  fletibus  et  luctui  apta  in- 
dumenta suscepit — ." 

Sap.  VII.  26. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Eccli.  XXVII.  28. 

"  Qui  in  altum  mittit  lapidem, 
super  caput  ejus  cadet :  et  plaga 
dolosa  dolosi  dividet  vulnera." 

Sap.  II.  21 — 22. 

"  Haec  cogitaverunt,  et  erra- 
verunt :  excaecavit  enim  illos 
malitia  eorum.  Et  nescierunt 
sacramenta  Dei — ." 

Sap.  VIII.  I. 

"  Attingit  ergo  a  fine  usque  ad 
finem  fortiter,  et  disponit  omnia 
suaviter." 

Eccli.  IV.  S3- 

"Pro  justitia  agonizare  pro 
anima  tua,  et  usque  ad  mortem 
certa  pro  justitia,  et  Deus  ex- 
pugnabit  pro  te  inimicos  tuos." 

Sap.  VIII.  2. 

"  Hanc  amavi,  et  exquisivi  a 
juventute  mea,  et  quaesivi  spon- 
sam  mihi  eam  assumere,  et  ama- 
tor  f actus  sum  formae  illius." 

Eccli.  III.  20. 

"  Quanto  magnus  es,  humilia 
te  in  omnibus,  et  coram  Deo  in- 
venies  gratiam — ." 


Eccli.  XXI.  2. 

"  Quasi  a  facie  colubri  fuge 
peccata  :  et  si  accesseris  ad  ilia, 
suscipient  te." 


Ibid.  20. 

"Simile  in  libro  Esther  dic- 
tum esse  de  illo,  inquies,  cum 
scriptum  est :  '  Cum  deposuisset 
omnem  ornatum  suum.' " 

Ibid.  Tom.  XV.  10. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Ibid.  Tom.  XVI.  3. 

"  Nam  '  qui  in  altum  mittit 
lapidem,  in  caput  suum  mittit.'  " 

Ibid. 

"  —  quoniam  *  excaecavit  illos 
malitia  eorum,  et  nescierunt  sa- 
cramenta Dei.'  " 

Ibid. 

"  —  cum, '  attingit  a  fine  terrae 
usque  ad  finem  fortiter,  et  dis- 
ponit '  ecclesias  '  suaviter.'  " 

Ibid.  Tom.  XVII.  25. 

"  —  illudque  dogma  observan- 
tes  :  '  Usque  ad  mortem  certa 
pro  veritate,  et  Deus  pugnabit 
pro  te.'  " 

Ibid.  32. 

"  Mulier  quidem  dicta  est  Sap- 
ientia  propter  illud  :  '  Quaesivi 
sponsam  mihi  eam  assumere.'" 

Orig.  in  Math.  Comment.  Se- 
ries, 12. 

"  —  cum  deberent  recordari 
Sapientiae  verbum  dicentis  : 
'  Quantum  magnus  es,  tantum 
humilia  te,  et  coram  Deo  invenies 
gratiam.'  "     (Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  42. 

" —  et  quod  ait  Sapientia : 
•  Quasi  a  facie  serpentis,  fuge 
peccatum.'  " 


110 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


Eccli.  IX.  4. 

"  Cum  saltatrice  ne  assiduus 
sis  :  nee  audias  illam,  ne  forte 
pereas  in  efficacia  illius." 

Eccli.  XXL  2. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Dan.  XIII.  55. 

"  Dixit  autem  Daniel :  Recte 
mentitus  es  in  caput  tuum:  Ecce 
enim  Angelus  Dei,  accepta  sen- 
tentia  ab  eo,  scindet  te  medium." 

Sap.  IX.  6. 

"  Nam  et  si  quis  erit  consum- 
matus  inter  filios  hominum,  si  ab 
illo  abfuerit  sapientia  tua,  in 
nihilum  computabitur." 

Sap.  VII.  17 — 20. 

(Already  quoted.) 


II.  Maccab.  VII.  28. 

"  Peto,  nate,  ut  aspicias  ad 
coelum  et  terram,  et  ad  omnia 
quae  in  eis  sunt :  et  intelligas, 
quia  ex  nihilo  fecit  ilia  Deus,  et 
hominum  genus." 


Esther  XIV.  11. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Judith,  IX.  2. 

"  Domine  Deus  patris  mei 
Simeon,  qui  dedisti  illi  gladium  in 
defensionem    alienigenarum — ." 

Baruch  III.  38. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Ibid.  44. 

"  Cum  saltatrice  noli  assiduus 
esse,  ne  forte  consumaris  in  de- 
sideriis  ejus." 

Ibid. 

"  Ideo  bene  dixit  Scriptura  : 
'Quasi  a  facie  serpentis,  fuge 
peccatum.'  " 

Ibid.  61. 

"  —  quoniam  Angelus  Deus  ; 
habens  gladium,  scindet  te  me- 
dium." 


Ibid.  69. 

"  —  quod  ait  Salomon  :  *  Et 
si  fuerit  quis  perfectus  inter  filios 
hominum,  si  abfuerit  ab  illo 
Sapientia  tua  in  nihilum  reputa- 
bitur.'  " 

Orig.  Horn.  XXI.  in  Lucam. 
(Already  quoted.) 

Orig.   Comment,  in  Joannem, 
Tom.  I.  18. 

"  Secus  vero  apud  nos  est,  qui 
credimus  ex  non  entibus  Deum 
entia  fecisse,  ut  mater  ilia  septem 
Martyrum  in  Machabaeorum  ges- 
tis,  et  poenitentiae  angelus  in 
'  Pastore '  docuit." 

Ibid.  Tom.  II.  7. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Ibid.  16. 

"Verum  Eliae  profecto  etiam 
est  Deus,  et,  ut  inquit  Judith, 
patris  sui  Symeon." 

Ibid.  Tom.  VI.  15. 

(Already  quoted.) 


THE    CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


Ill 


Eccli.  XVIII.  6. 

"  Cum  consummaverit  homo, 
tunc  incipiet :  et  cum  quieverit, 
aporiabitur." 


Sap.  XVII.   I. 

"  Magna  sunt  enim  judicia  tua, 
Domine,  et  inenarrabilia  verba 
tua  :  propter  hoc  indisciplinatae 
animae  erraverunt." 

Sap.  VII.  26. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

I.  Maccab.  I.  22 — 23. 

"  —  et  ascendit  Jerosolymam 
in  multitudine  gravi.  Et  intravit 
in  sanctificationem  cum  superbia, 
et  accepit  altare  aureum,  et  can- 
delabrum luminis,  et  universa 
vasa  ejus,  et  mensam  proposi- 
tionis,  et  libatoria,  et  phialas,  et 
mortariola  aurea,  et  velum,  et 
coronas,  et  ornamentum  aureum, 
quod  in  facie  templi  erat :  et 
comminuit  omnia." 

Eccli.  III.  22. 

"  Altiora  te  ne  quaesieris,  et 
fortiora  te  ne  scrutatus  fueris — ," 

Sap.  25 — 26. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Eccli.  XXI.  18. 

"  Verbum  sapiens  quodcumque 
audierit  scius  laudabit,  et  ad  se 
adjiciet — ." 

II.  Maccab.  XV.  14. 

"  Respondentem  vero  Oniam 
dixisse  :  Hie  est  fratrum  amator, 
et  populi  Israel :  hie  est,  qui 
multum  orat  pro  populo,  et  uni- 
versa sancta  civitate,  Jeremias, 
propheta  Dei." 


Ibid.  19. 

"  *  Quoniam  cum  absolverit 
homo,  tunc  incipit  ;  et  quum 
quieverit,  tunc  incertus  erit,' 
juxta  Jesu  filii  Sirach  Sapien- 
tiam." 

Ibid.  s6. 

"'Magna  enim  judicia  Dei,' 
eaque  aegre  nee  facile  narrantur, 
atque  'ob  banc  causam  rudes 
animae  erraverunt,'  " 

Ibid.  37. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  Tom.  X.  22. 

"  Apparet  etiam  apud  Mac- 
chabaica,  multam  inconstantiam 
et  confusionem  fuisse,  circa 
templum  et  circa  populum — ." 


Ibid.  Tom.  XIII.  5. 

"Te  difliciliora  ne  quaeras,  et 
te  fortiora  ne  vestiga." 

Ibid.  27. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  46. 

" — quoniam  autem  *  si  sermo- 
nem  sapientem  audierit  sapiens, 
laudabit  eum,  et  ad  ipsum 
addet— .'  " 

Ibid.  57. 

" — quemadmodum  in  Macha- 
baeorum  gestis  scriptum  est,  post 
plurimos  annos  ab  obitu  Jere- 
miae  :  '  Hie  est  Jeremias,  Dei 
Propheta,  qui  multum  orat  pro 
populo.' " 


112 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   CHURCH. 


Dan.  XIII.  42. 

"  Exclamavit  autem  voce 
magna  Susanna,  et  dixit :  Deus 
aeterne,  qui  absconditorum  es 
cognitor,  qui  nosti  omnia  ante- 
quam  fiant — ." 

Sap.  VII.  9. 

"  —  nee  comparavi  illi  lapi- 
dem  pretiosum  ;  quoniam  omne 
aurum  in  comparatione  illius, 
arena  est  exigua,  et  tamquam 
lutu«i  aestimabitur  argentum  in 
conspectu  illius." 

Sap.  X.  3—4. 

"  Ab  hac  ut  recessit  injustus 
in  ira  sua,  per  iram  homicidii 
fraterni  deperiit.  Propter  quem, 
cum  aqua  deleret  terrara,  sanavit 
iterum  sapientia,  per  contempti- 
bile  lignum  justum  gubernans." 

Sap.  X.  7. 

"  —  quibus  in  testimonium  ne- 
quitiae  fumigabunda  constat  de- 
serta  terra,  et  incerto  tempore 
fructus  habentes  arbores,  et  in- 
credibilis  animae  memoria  stans 
figmentum  salis." 

Dan.  XIIL  56. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Sap.  XII.  II. 

"  Semen  enim  erat  maledictum 

ab  initio  :   nee  timens  aliquem, 
veniam  dabas  peccatis  illorum." 

Sap.  II.  24. 

"  Invidia  autem  diaboli,  mors 
introivit  in  orbem  terrarura." 

Sap.  VIII.  2. 

"  Hanc  amavi,  et  exquisivi  a 
juventute  mea,  et  quaesivi  spon- 
sam  mihi  eam  assumere,  et  ama- 
tor  f actus  sum  formae  illius." 


Ibid.  58. 

"Quoraodo  etiam  servat  illud: 
'Qui  videt  omnia  ante  ortum 
iosorum.'" 


Ibid.  Tom.  XIX.  2. 

"  Sapientia  siquidem  erat  qui- 
vis  ejus  sermo,  de  qua  dicitur  : 
'Omne  aurum  coram  sapientia 
est  pauca  arena  ;  et  ceu  coenum 
reputabitur  argentum  coram  ea.'  " 

Ibid.  Tom.  XX.  4. 

"Sapientiae  liber,  Salomoni 
inscriptus,  his  verbis  docet : 
'  Recedens  autem  ab  ipsa,  injus- 
tus in  ira  sua  periit  cum  animis 
fratricidis,  per  quem  inundatam 
terram  rursus  servavit  Sapientia, 

vili  ligno  justum  gubernans.' . 

' — quorum  etiamnum  malitiae 
testimonio  f umosum  restat  solum, 
et  plantae  intempestivum  fruc- 
tum  ferentes.' " 


Ibid.  5. 


(Oft  quoted.) 


Ibid. 


" — dicente  Sapientia:  '  Semen 
execratione  devotum  ab  initio.'" 

Ibid.  21. 

"Sic  *  Invidia  mors  introivit  in 
mundum.'  " 

Ibid.  33. 

" — qui   dicit:  '  Amator   f actus 
sum  pulchritudinis  illius.'  " 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


113 


Eccli.  V.  8. 

"  Non  tardes  convert!  ad  Do- 
minum,  et  ne  differas  de  die  in 
diem." 

Dan.  XIII.  9  et  35. 

"  — et  everterunt  sensum  suum, 
et  declinaverunt  oculos  suos  ut 
non  viderent  caelum,  neque  re- 
cordarentur  judiciorum  justorum. 

Quae  flens  suspexit  ad  caelum: 
erat  enim  cor  ejus  fiduciam 
habens  in  Domino." 


Sap.  I.  5. 

"  Spiritus  enim  sanctus  discip- 
linae  effugiet  fictum,  et  auferet 
se  a  cogitationibus,  quae  sunt 
sine  intellectu,  et  corripietur  a 
superveniente  iniquitate." 

Sap.  II.  24. 

(Oft  quoted.) 
Eccli.  XXXI.  17. 
"  Ne  comprimaris  in  convivio." 


Dan.  XIII.  42. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Sap.  VII.  25—26. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Eccli.  XV.  17—18. 

"Apposuit  tibi  aquam  et  ig- 
nem  :  ad  quod  volueris,  porrige 
manum  tuam.  Ante  hominem 
vita  et  mors,  bonum  et  malum  : 
quod  placuerit  ei,  dabitur  illi — ." 

Sap.  XI.  21, 

" — sed  omnia  in  mensura,  et 
numero,  et  pondere,  disposuisti." 

H 


Ibid.  Tom.  XXVIII.  3. 

"  Quocirca  memores  simus 
necesse  est  illius  dicti :  '  Ne 
percuncteris  reverti  ad  Dominum 
neque  differas  de  die  in  diem.' " 

Ibid. 

"  *Et  averterunt  mentem  suam, 
et  declinarunt  oculos  suos,  ne  in 
coelum  suspicerent,  neque  mem- 
ores essent  judiciorum  justorum.' 
Adducemus  etiam  in  medium 
quae  de  Susanna  scribuntur  hoc 
modo  dicta  :  *  At  ilia  flens  sus- 
pexit in  coelum,  quoniam  cor 
ejus  fidebat  Domino.'" 

Ibid.  13. 

"  Spiritus  sanctus  disciplinae 
effugiet  dolosum,  et  recedet  a 
pravis  consiliis." 


Ibid.  Tom.  XXXII.  3. 
(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  14. 

"  Scriptum  est  enim  et  hoc 
quoque  :  '  Ne  comprimaris  cum 
eo  in  catino.'  " 

Orig.   Comment,  in   Epist.  ad 
Rom.  Lib.  I.  3. 
(Already  quoted.) 

Ibid.  5. 

(Oft  quoted.) 
Ibid.  18. 

" — sicut  scriptum  est :  '  Ecce 
posui  ante  faciem  tuam  vitam  et 
mortem,  ignem  et  aquam.'  " 


Ibid.  Lib.  II.  3. 

"  Sed  sicut  omnia  in  men- 
sura facit  Deus,  et  pondere  et 
numero — ." 


114 


THE  CANON   OF  THE  CHURCH. 


Tob.  XII.  7. 

"  Etenim  sacramentum  regis 
abscondere  bonum  est :  opera 
autem_Dei  revelare  et  confiteri 
honorificum  est." 

Baruch  IV.  4. 

"  Beati  sumus,  Israel  :  quia 
quae  Deo  placent,  manifesta 
sunt  nobis." 

Eccli.  XXVIII.  28. 

"  Sepi  aures  tuas  spinis,  lin- 
guam  nequam  noli  audire,  et 
ori  tuo  facito  ostia,  et  seras." 


Eccli.  XI.  30. 

"  Ante  mortem  ne  laudes  hora- 
inem  quemquam,  quoniam  in 
filiis  suis  agnoscitur  vir." 

Sap.  IX.  15. 

"  Corpus  enim,  quod  corrum- 
pitur,  aggravat  animam,  et  ter- 
rena  inhabitatio  deprimit  sensum 
multa  cogitantem." 

Sap.  I.  I. 

"  Diligite  justitiam,  qui  judi- 
catis  terram." 

Tob.  IV.  16. 

"Quod  ab  alio  oderis  fieri 
tibi,  vide  ne  tu  aliquando  alteri 
facias." 

Eccli.  XV.  9. 

"  Non  est  speciosa  laus  in  ore 
peccatoris — ." 


Ibid.  4. 

"  *  Mysterium  '  vero  '  regis  ab- 
scondere bonum  est.'  " 


Ibid.  7. 

" —  et  ipsi  dicunt :  *  Beati  su- 
mus, Israel,  quia  quae  placent 
Deo  nobis  nota  sunt.'  " 

Ibid.  13. 

" — et  dicet  circumcidi  aures, 
cum  secundum  Salomonis  monita 
non  recipiunt  vanam  auditionem, 
etcum  oppilantur,  ne  audiant  ju- 
dicium sanguinis,  et  cum  sepiun- 
tur  spinis  ne  recipiant  obtrectatio- 
nem." 

Ibid.  Lib.  III.  2. 

" — sicut    et    Scriptura  dicit : 

*  Ne  beatificaveris  hominem  ante 
mortem,  quia  nescis  quae  erunt 
ejus  novissima.' " 

Ibid. 

" —  nunc  vero,  ut  ait  Scrip- 
tura, '  Corruptibile  corpus  aggra- 
vat animam,  et  demergit  terrena 
habitatio  sensum  multa  cogitan- 
tem.'" 

Ibid.  7. 

" — et    ideo    (Sapientia)    ait: 

*  Discite  justitiam,  qui  judicatis 
terram.' " 

Ibid. 

"Ilia  enim  lex  potest  sentire 
quod  inter  homines  justum  sit, 
ut  quod  in  se  quis  pati  non  vult, 
hoc  ne  proximo  faciat." 

Ibid. 

"  Et  iterum  alia  Scriptura  di- 
cit:  *Non  est  speciosa  laus  Dei 
in  ore  peccatoris.' " 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


115 


Sap.  VII.  26. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

II.  Maccab.  VII.  i,  et  seqq. 

**  Contigit  autem  et  septem 
fratres  una  cum  matre  sua  appre- 
hensos  compelli  a  rege  edere 
contra  fas  carnes  porcinas,  fla- 
gris,  et  taureis  cruciatos." 


Baruch  III.  36—38. 
(Oft  quoted.) 

Sap.  X.  I. 

*'  Haec  ilium,  qui  primus  for- 
matus  est  a  Deo  pater  orbis  ter- 
rarum,  cum  solus  esset  creatus, 
custodivit." 

Sap.  IX.  6. 

"  Nam  et  si  quis  erit  consum- 
matus  inter  filios  hominum,  si  ab 
illo  abfuerit  sapientia  tua,  in 
nihilum  computabitur." 

Sap.  IX.  15. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Dan.  III.  86.  Deut.  Frag. 

"  Benedicite,  spiritus  et  ani- 
mae  justorum,  Domino  :  laudate 
et  superexaltate  eum  in  saecula." 

Eccli.  I.  16. 

"  Initium  sapientiae,  timor 
Domini — ." 

Sap.  IX.  15. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Eccli.  VII.  40. 

"  In  omnibus  operibus  tuis 
memorare  novissima  tua,  et  in 
aeternum  non  peccabis." 


Ibid.  Lib.  IV.  8. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  10. 

"Legant  Machabaeorum  libros, 
ubi  cum  omni  instantia  mater 
cum  septem  filiis  martyrium  sus- 
cipit,  quique  non  solum  martyr- 
ium patienter  excipiunt,  verum 
et  contumelias  ingerunt  in  tyran- 
num  — ." 


Ibid. 


(Oft  quoted.) 


Ibid.  Lib.  V.  2. 

"  — sicut  de  Sapientia  dicitur  : 
'  Haec,*  inquit,  '  ilium  qui  primus 
factus  est  patrem  mundi,  cum 
solus  esset  creatus,  custodivit,  et 
liberavit  eum  de  peccato  suo.'  " 

Ibid.  3. 

*' —  quia  et  si  perfectus  sit 
quis  in  filiis  hominum,  si  non 
adsit  ei  justitia  a  Deo,  in  nihilum 
reputabitur." 

Ibid.  Lib.  VI.  3. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  Lib.  VII.  i. 

"  Et  Daniel  nihilominus  testa- 
tur  et  dicit :  *  Benedicite,  spiritus 
et  aniraae  justorum,  Dominum.'  " 

Ibid. 

" —  quia  'initium  sapientiae 
timor  Domini.'  " 

Ibid.  4. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  10. 

''Mementote  novissimorum  tu- 
orum,  et  in  aeternum  non  pec- 
cabis." 


116 


THE   CANON   OF  THE  CHURCH. 


Sap.  VII.  25. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Sap.  I.  7. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Eccli.  XXVII.  6. 

"  Vasa  figuli  probat  fornax;  et 
homines  justos,  tentatio  tribula- 
tionis." 

Sap.  VII.  26. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Sap.  I.  2. 

"  — quoniam  invenitur  ab  his, 
qui  non  tentant  ilium  :  apparet 
autem  eis,  qui  fidem  habent  in 
ilium—." 

Tob.  XII.  7. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Sap.  IX.  6. 

(Oft  quoted.) 
Eccli.  VIII.  6. 


Ibid.  13. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  17. 

"Et  Sapientia  dicit  :  'vasa 
figuli  probat  fornax;  et  homines 
justos,  tentatio.' " 

Ibid.  Lib.  VIII.  4. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  5. 

"  Sed  audi  quid  etiam  in  Sa- 
pientia Salomonis  dicatur,  quia  : 
*  non  invenietur  ab  his  qui  ten- 
tant earn :  apparebit  vero  his  qui 
non  sunt  increduli  ad  eum,'" 

Ibid.  II. 

** '  Mysterium  enim  regis,'  ait 
Scriptura,  *  celare  bonum  est  *  " 

Ibid.  Lib.  IX.  3. 

(Oft  quoted.) 


Ibid.  Lib.  X.  31. 

"  Ne  despicias  hominem  aver-  " — didicerat  enim  a  Scriptura 

tentem  se  a  peccato,  neque  im-  non  improperare  homini  conver- 

properes  ei ;  memento  quoniam  tenti  se  a  peccato y 
omnes  in  correptione  sumus." 

From  these  numerous  quotations,  taken  from  the  fragments 
which  remain  of  Origen's  vast  writings,  we  may  infer  what 
was  his  use  of  the  deuterocanonical  books.  His  authority  is 
especially  valuable,  because  he  was  conversant  with  Hebrew, 
and  had  examined  the  canon  of  the  Jews  upon  their  own 
grounds.  He  defends  the  deuterocanonical  books  against  the 
attack  of  Africanus  and  the  Jews ;  he  establishes  the  authority 
of  the  Church  as  criterion  of  the  Canon  ;  in  his  use  of  Scrip- 
ture he  makes  no  discrimination  between  the  books  of  the 
first  and  second  canons,  and  unreservedly  asserts  that  the 
deuterocanonical  works  are  divine  Scripture.  Hence  we  claim 
the  authority  of  Origen  in  support  of  the  Catholic  Canon  of 
Scripture. 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   CHURCH.  117 

In  the  acts  of  the  disputation  of  St.  Archelaus  with  Manes, 
we  find  a  quotation  from  Wisdom.* 

This  quotation  is  of  much  worth,  since  it  manifests  that  in 
that  early  day  the  canon  of  the  Syrian  Church  comprised  the 
deuterocanonical  works.  The  quotation  is  found  in  the 
twenty-ninth  chapter  of  the  disputation  : 

Sap.  I.  13. 

" —   quoniam    Deus    mortem  "Archelaus     dixit:      Nequa- 

non  fecit,  nee  laetatur  in  perdi-      quam  :  absit  !    '  Deus  enim  mor- 
titione  vivorum."  tem  non  fecit,  nee  laetatur  in  per- 

ditione  vivorum.' " 

We  shall  here  subjoin  some  quotations  found  in  the  extant 
works  of  St.  Methodius,  surnamed  Eubulius,  Bishop  of  Tyr, 
the  bitter  adversary  of  Origen.f 

These  two  writers,  though  antagonistic  in  doctrine,  both 
aid  in  building  up  our  thesis,  since  both  recognize  the  accepted 
divine  Scripture  of  the  third  century.  In  the  first  discourse, 
that  of  Marcella,  in  the  symposium,  we  find  the  following : 

Eccli.  XVIII.  30,  et  XIX.  2. 

"  Post     concupiscentias     tuas  "  Post  concupiscentias  tuas  ne 

non  eas,  et  a  voluntate  tua  aver-  eas,  et  ab  appetitibus  tuis  pro- 

tere.     Vinum  et  mulieres  aposta-  hibe  te.     Vinum  enim  et  muli- 

tare  faciunt  sapientes,  et  arguent  eres   apostatare    faciunt   sapien- 

sensatos  — ."  tes." 

Sap.  IV.  3.  Ibid. 

"Multigena   autem    impiorum  " — de  quo  et  alibi:   '  Multi- 

multitudo  non  erit  utilis,  et  spu-  gena    impiorum   multitude   non 

ria  vitulamina  non  dabunt  radi-  erit   utilis,    et  spuria  vitulamina 

ces  altas — ."  non  dabunt  radices  altas.'  " 

Eccli.  XXIII.  I,  et  5—6.  Ibid. 

"  Domine,  pater  et  dominator  **  *  Domine,'  dicens   *  Pater  et 

vitae  meae,  ne  derelinquas  me  in  Deus  vitae  meae,  ne  derelinquas 

consilio  eorum  nee  sinas  me  ca-  me  in  cogitatu  illorum.     Extol- 

*St.  Archelaus  was  a  bishop  of  Mesopotamia,  renowned  for  piety  and 
wisdom.  The  date  of  the  disputation  with  Manes  is  the  year  277  A.  D.  It 
is  uncertain  who  has  committed  the  disputation  to  writing. 

fThe  Roman  martyrology  honors  St.  Methodius  on  the  18th  of  Septem-- 
ber.  He  was  of  Olympius,  in  Lycia,  and  afterwards  bishop  of  Tyr.  He 
suffered  martyrdom  in  Chalcis,  in  Greece  ;  according  to  some,  under  Diocle- 
tian ;  according  to  others,  under  Decius  and  Valerius.  De  Feller  inclines  to 
the  first  opinion,  and  places  the  date  of  such  event  about  the  year  311.  His 
doctrine,  though  at  times  inaccurate,  has  been  much  praised  by  Jerome, 
Epiphanius,  Gregory  of  Nyssa  and  others.  His  most  celebrated  work  is  the 
"  Symposium  of  Virgins,"  in  which  he  extols  the  virtue  of  chastity. 


118 


THE  CANON   OF  THE   CHURCH. 


dere  in  illis.  Extollentiam  ocu- 
lorum  meorum  ne  dederis  mihi, 
et  omne  desiderium  averte  a  me. 
Aufer  a  me  ventris  concupiscen- 
tias,  et  concubitus  concupiscen- 
tiae,  ne  apprehendant  me — ." 

Sap.  IV.  1—2. 

"  O,  quam  pulchra  est  casta 
generatio  cum  claritate  !  immor- 
talis  est  enim  memoria  illius, 
quoniam  et  apud  Deum  nota  est, 
et  apud  homines.  Cum  praesens 
est,  imitantur  illam,  et  deside- 
rant  eam,  cum  se  eduxerit,  et  in 
perpetuum  coronata  triumphat 
incoinquinatorum  certaminum 
praemium  vincens." 


lentiam  oculorum  amove  a  me. 
Cordis  concupiscentia  et  con- 
cubitus ne  apprehendant  me.'  " 


Ibid. 

"  In  libro  vero  Sapientiae  pa- 
lam  jam,  et  sine  ambagibus  audi- 
tores  ad  continentiam,  et  castita- 
tem    attrahens    Spiritus    sanctus 

talia   modulatur    .    damans  : 

'  Immortalis  enim  est  in  memoria 
illius  :  quoniam  et  apud  Deum 
nota  est  et  apud  homines.  Cum 
praesens  est  honorant  illam  et 
desiderant  eam,  cum  se  abduxe- 
rit,  et  in  perpetuum  coronata 
triumphat  incoinquinatorum  cer- 
taminum agone  superato.' " 


Sap.  III.  i6. 

"  Filii  autem  adulterorum  in 
inconsummatione  erunt,  et  ab 
iniquo  thoro  semen  exterminabi- 
tur." 

Sap.  IV.  6. 

"  Ex  iniquis  enim  somnis  filii, 
qui  nascuntur,  testes  sunt  nequi- 
tiae  adversus  parentes  in  interro- 
gatione  sua." 

Sap.  XV.  lo— II. 

"Cinis  est  enim  cor  ejus,  et 
terra  supervacua  spes  illius,  et 
luto  vilior  vita  ejus,  quoniam  ig- 
noravit,  qui  se  finxit,  et  qui  in- 
spiravit  illi  animam  quae  opera- 
tur,  et  qui  insufflavit  ei  spiritum 
vitalem." 


In  the  second  discourse,  that 
of   Theophila  : 

"Et  ne  confugias  velut  in 
arcem  securam,  prolato  testi- 
monio  Scripturae  dicentis  :  *  Filii 
adulterorum  in  inconsumma- 
tione erunt.' " 

Ibid. 

" '  Ex  iniquis  enim,'  inquit, 
*  somnis,  filii  qui  nascuntur,  testes 
sunt  nequitiae  adversus  parentes 
in  interrogatione  persuasibilium 
sermonum.' " 

Ibid. 

" — in  libro  Sapientiae  ait: 
'  Cinis  est  cor  eorum,  et  terra  su- 
pervacua spes  illorum,  et  luto 
vilior  vita  eorum,  quoniam  igno- 
rarunt  qui  se  finxit,  et  qui  inspi- 
ravit  illis  animam  quae  operatur, 
et  qui  insufiiavit  eis  spiritum  vi- 
talem.'" 


THE   CANON   OF  THE  CHURCH. 


119 


Baruch  III.  14. 

"  Disce,  ubi  sit  prudentia,  ubi 
sit  virtus,  ubi  sit  intellectus,  ut 
scias  simul,  ubi  sit  longiturnitas 
vitae  et  victus,  ubi  sit  lumen  ocu- 
lorum  et  pax." 


Sap.  VII.  9. 

" —  nee  comparavi  illi  lapidem 
pretiosum,  quoniam  omne  aurum 
in  comparatione  illius  arena  est 
exigua,  et  tamquam  lutum  aesti- 
mabitur  argentum  in  conspectu 
illius." 


Judith  XIII.  Passim. 


Dan.  XIII.  19 — 20. 

"  Cum  autem  egressae  essent 
puellae,  surrexerunt  duo  senes,  et 
accurrerunt  ad  earn,  et  dixe- 
runt:  Ecce  ostia  pomarii  clausa 
sunt,  et  nemo  nos  videt,  et  nos  in- 
concupiscentia  tui  sumus;  quam 
ob  rem  assentire  nobis,  et  com- 
miscere  nobiscum." 

Sap.  I.  14. 

"  Creavit  enim,  ut  essent  om- 
nia, et  sanabiles  fecit  nationes 
orbis  terrarum  :  et  non  est  in  illis 
medicamentum  exterminii,  nee 
inferorum  regnum  in  terra." 


In  the  eighth  discourse,  that  of 
Thecla : 

"  Discite  ubi  sit  prudentia, 
ubi  sit  virtus,  ubi  sit  intel- 
lectus ;  ut  scias  simul  ubi  sit 
longiturnitas  vitae  et  victus,  ubi 
sit  lumen  oculorum  et  pax.  Quis 
invenit  locum  ejus  ?  et  quis  in- 
travit  in  thesauros  eorum  ? " 

In  the  eleventh  discourse,  that 
of  Arete  : 

"  Neque  si  quis  pecuniarum 
cupiditate  capitur,  virginitatem 
vere  studet  colere  :  spernit  enim 
illam,  verius  lucrum  exiguum 
ipsi  praeferens  ;  cui  tamen  nulla 
est  eomparabilis  rerum  in  vita 
pretiosarum." 

Ibid. 

"  Peregrinum  ductorem  nume- 
rosissimorum  exercituum  fortiter 
aggrediens,  ardua  feliciter  exe- 
quens  destinata,  Judith  dolose 
decollavit  pulchritudinis  suae  de- 
linitum  specie  priusquam  ullam 
membris  corporis  obtulisset  ma- 
culam  — ." 

Ibid. 

"  Videntes  speciem  decorara 
nudi  Susannae  corporis,  duo  ju- 
diees  amore  furentes  dixerunt : 
*  O  mulier,  hie  adsumus  te  clam 
potiri  cupientes.'  " 


St.  Method.  De  Resurrectione 
(Fragmentary). 

" — sapienta  adstruit  his  ver- 
bis :  '  Creavit  enim  Deus  ut 
essent  omnia,  et  salutares  sunt 
mundi  generationes,  et  non  est  in 
illis  medicamentum  exterminii.' " 


120 


THE  CANON   OF  THE  CHURCH. 


Sap.  II.  23. 

"  Quoniam  Deus  creavit  homi- 
nem  inexterminabilem,  et  ad  ima- 
ginem  similitudinis  suae  fecit 
ilium." 

Sap.  VII.  21. 

" — et  quaecumque  sunt  ab- 
sconsa  et  improvisa,  didici  :  om- 
nium enim  artifex  doeuit  me  sa- 
pientia." 

Eccli.  XV.  18. 

"  Ante  hominem  vita  et  mors, 
bonum  et  malum  ;  quod  placu- 
erit  ei,  dabitur  illi  — ." 

Eccli.  I.  2. 

"  Arenam  maris,  et  pluviae  gut- 
tas,  et  dies  saeculi  quis  dinume- 
ravit  ?  " 


Sap.  XV.  3. 

"  Nosse  enim  te,  consummata 
justitia  est  ;  et  scire  justitiam 
et  virtutem  tuam,  radix  est  im- 
mortalitatis." 

Baruch  III.  24. 

"  O  Israel,  quam  magna  est 
domus  Dei,  et  ingens  locus  pos- 
sessionis  ejus  !  " 


Eccli.  XVI.  7. 

"  In  synagoga  peccantium  ex- 
ardebit  ignis,  et  in  gente  incredi- 
bili  exardescet  ira." 

Dan.  XIII.  56. 

"Et,  amoto  eo,  jussit  venire 
alium,  et  dixit  ei :  Semen  Cha- 
naan  et  non  Juda,  species  dece- 
pit  te,  et  concupiscentia  subver- 
tit  cor  tuum — ." 


Ibid. 

"  Atqui  homo  est  immortalis  : 
'Creavit  enim,'  inquit  Sapientia, 
*  hominem  inexterminabilem,  et 
imaginem  aeternitatis  suae  fecit 
ilium.*  " 

Ibid,  in  fine. 

"Quamobrem  etiam  Salomon 
'artificem  omnium  '  apellavit — ." 


Ibid,  ex  fragmentis. 
"  Posui   enim,'    inquit,    '  ante 
faciem  tuam  vitam  et  mortem.'  " 

St.  Method.  De  Creatis.  (frag- 
mentary). 

"  —  quomodo  Sapientia  in  Jesu 
Sirach  dicit :  '  Arenam  maris,  et 
pluviae  guttas,  et  dies  saeculi 
quis  dinumerabit  ?'  " 

S.  Method.  De  Simeone  et 
Anna. 

"  Porro  :  '  Nosse  te  consum- 
mata justitia  est,  et  scire  poten- 
tiam  tuam  radix  immortalita- 
tis." 

Ibid. 

"  —  ut  quodam  loco  inclytus 
Propheta  ait :  *  Quam  magna 
domus  Dei,  et  ingens  locus  pos- 
sessionis  ejus  !  Magnus,  et  non 
habet  finem.'  " 

Ibid. 

"  Item  alio  loco  :  *  In  gente  in- 
credibili  exardescit  ignis.' " 

S.  Methodius,  in  Ramos  Pal- 
marum. 

"O  Chanaan  impudentis  se- 
men, non  pii  ac  timentis  Deum, 
Juda  ! " 


THE    CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH.  121 

Method,  quoted  by  Olympia- 
Sap.  XII.  I.  dorus  in  Catena  Nicetae. 

"  O  quam  bonus  et  suavis  est,  *'  Methodius   autem,    Spiritum 

Domine,  spiritus  tuus  in  omni-      divinum  qui  a  Deo  omnibus  con- 
bus  !  "  cessus   est,  et  de   quo   Salomon 

dixit:  'Incorruptus  tuus  Spiri- 
tus in  omnibus',  pro  conscientia 
accipit,  quae  et  animam  peccatri- 
cem  condemnet." 

There  are  several  quotations  from  deuterocanonical  Scrip- 
ture in  the  works  of  St.  Gregory  of  Neocesarea,  which  we  omit 
here,  since  they  are  found  in  works  which  Migne  judged 
dubious. 

There  are  a  few  certain  citations  from  the  deuterocanonical 
books  in  the  fragments  which  have  been  collected  of  the  works 
of  Dionysius  the  Great.* 

Eccli.  XVI.  26 — 27.  Dionysius,  De  Natura  III.  B. 

"  In  judicio  Dei  opera  ejus  ab  "  Audite   vero  divinorum   or- 

initio,  et  ab  institutione  ipsorum  aculorum    vocem  :     '  In    judicio 

distinxit  partes  illorum,  et  initia  Domini  opera  ejus.     Ab  initio  et 

eorum  in  gentibus  suis.    Ornavit  a     creatione    ipsorum    distinxit 

in  aeternum  opera  illorum,  nee  partes  illorum.  Ornavit  in  aeter- 

esurierunt,  nee  laboraverunt,  et  num     opera     sua,    et    principia 

nondestiterunt  ab  operibussuis."  eorum  in  generationes  eorum.' " 

*Tlie  precise  date  of  the  birth  of  Dionysius  the  Great  is  uncertain. 
He  was  in  Egypt  when  Cyprian  was  in  North  Africa,  and  he  came  under 
the  influence  of  Origen.  He  succeeded  Heraclas  in  the  Episcopal  See  of 
Alexandria  in  247  A.  D.,  which  see  he  held  for  17  years,  till  his  death  in  265. 
He  was  forced  to  flee  in  the  Decian  persecution,  and,  at  one  time,  his  life  was 
only  saved  by  a  miracle.  Under  Valerian,  he  made  a  public  profession  of 
faith,  and  was  exiled  to  Cephro  in  Libyia.  Having  strenously  opposed  the 
Sabellian  Heresy,  he  was  denounced  to  Dionysius.  the  Roman  Pontiff,  that 
his  tenets  were  not  soimd  concerning  the  consubstantiality  of  the  Son  and 
the  Father.  As  Sabellius  had  denied  that  there  were  any  distinction  between 
the  Father  and  the  Son,  Dionysius,  in  opposition,  may  have  exceeded  bounds 
somewhat  in  extending  the  distinction  between  these  two  persons,  but  his 
error  was  not  formal.  Dionysius  cleared  himself  of  imputation  of  heresy, 
publishing  four  books  in  his  own  defense.  There  came  a  lull  in  the  persecu- 
tion under  Gallieno,  and  in  261  Dionysius  returned  to  his  see.  He  was  called 
to  Antioch  to  give  judgment  in  the  trial  of  the  heretic  Paul  of  Samosata,  but 
feebleness  prevented  a  personal  appearance  there.  He  signified  his  opinions 
in  writings,  fragments  of  which  remain.  Dionysius  wrote  many  things,  but 
only  small  fragments  of  these  remain.  The  most  important  of  his  works  are 
his  Apology  and  his  Letters. 

The  few  quotations  which  we  shall  adduce  will  place  Dionysius  in  the 
rank  of  those  who  considered  the  deuterocanonical  books  as  divine  Scripture. 


122 


THE  CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


Eccli.  XVI.  30—31. 

"  Post  haec  Deus  in  terrain 
respexit,  et  implevit  illam  bonis 
suis.  Anima  omnis  vitalis  de- 
nuntiavit  ante  faciem  ipsius,  et 
in  ipsam  iterum  reversio  illorum." 

Tob.  XII.  7. 

"  Etenim  sacramentum  regis 
abscondere  bonum  est  :  opera 
autem  Dei  revelare  et  confiteri, 
honorificum  est." 


Ibid.  V.  A. 

" — et  illud:  'post  haec  enim 
Dominus  in  terram  respexit,  et 
implevit  illam  bonis  suis.  Anima 
omnis  animantis  operuit  faciem 

ejus.'  " 

Idem.     Epist.     X.    (Adversus 
Germanum)  IV. 

*'  Sed  quoniam  arcanum  qui- 
dem  regis  occultare,  ut  ait  Scrip- 
iura,  laudandum  est ;  Dei  autem 
opera  praedicare,  gloriosum;  ad- 
versus Germani  impetum  comi- 
nus  decertabo." 

The  Constitutiones  Apostolicae  also  manifest  that  the 
Church,  in  the  third  century,  recognized  the  deuterocanonical 
books  as  divine  Scripture.* 


Eccli.  XXVIII.  16. 

"  Lingua  tertia  multos  com- 
movit,  et  dispersit  illos  de  gente 
in  gentem — ." 

Dan.  XIII. 


Dan.  XIII.  48—49. 

"  Qui  cum  staret  in  medio 
eorum  ait :  Sic  fatui  filii  Israel, 
non  judicantes,  neque  quod  ve- 


Const.  Apost.  Lib.  II.  21. 

"  Multi  quippe  sunt  malevoli 
dicaces,  tertiam  linguam  haben- 

tes." 

Ibid.  XXXVII. 

"  —  ut  olim  Babylone  duo 
senes  adversum  Susannam — ." 
(The  same  allusion  is  repeated 
in  the  XLIX.  Chapter.) 

Ibid.  L.  I. 

"Quoniam  Susannam  quidem 
Dominus  per  Danielem  eripuit  e 
manibus  iniquorum  ;  reos  autem 


*The  age  and  author  of  the  Apostolical  Constitutions  are  uncertain. 
They  are  inserted  by  Migne  among  the  Opera  dubia  of  St.  Clement  of  Rome  ; 
but  no  one  now  attributes  to  him  their  authorship.  De  Magistris  contends 
that  their  author  was  St.  Hippolyte,  although  he  admits  later  interpolations. 
It  is  quite  generally  admitted  now  that  the  work  is  a  product  of  the  third 
century  which  has  siiffered  later  interpolations.  The  work  consisted  of  eight 
books,  o/cra/St/SXoi',  containing  practical  precepts  of  Christian  life,  and  prin- 
ciples of  church  polity.  Though  of  uncertain  authorship,  and  often  erroneous 
in  its  present  state  in  dogma,  it  is  valuable  to  illustrate  the  traditions  of  the 
Church  in  that  early  age.  Opinions  differ  as  to  the  date  of  its  origin,  but  all 
agree  that  it  goes  back  to  the  third  century.  The  name  does  not  indicate 
that  its  author  wished  to  deceive  by  making  it  appear  that  his  book  was 
written  by  the  Apostles.  The  Constitutions  were  called  Apostolic,  because 
they  were  founded  on  the  applied  teachings  of  the  Apostles. 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


123 


rum  est  cognoscentes,  condem- 
nastis  filiam  Israel  ?  Revertimini 
ad  judicium,  quia  falsum  testi- 
monium locuti  sunt  adversus 
eam." 


Judith  XII.  8. 

"  Et  ut  ascendebat,  orabat  Do- 
minum  Deum  Israel,  ut  dirigeret 
viam  ejus  ad  liberationem  populi 
sui." 

Eccli.  XXVI.  28. 

"  Duae  species  difficiles  et 
periculosae  mihi  apparuerunt: 
difficile  exuitur  negotians  a  neg- 
ligentia :  et  non  justificabitur 
caupo  a  peccatis  labiorum." 

Eccli.  XXX.  12. 

"Curva  cervicem  ejus  in  ju- 
ventute,  et  tunde  latera  ejus, 
dum  infans  est,  ne  forte  induret, 
et  non  credat  tibi :  et  erit  tibi 
dolor  animae." 

Esther  IV.  16. 

"Vade  et  congrega  omnes  Ju- 
daeos,  quos  in  Susan  repereris, 
et  orate  pro  me.  Non  comeda- 
tis,  et  non  bibatis  tribus  diebus 
et  tribus  noctibus,  et  ego  cum 
ancillis  meis  similiter  jejunabo  : 
et  tunc  ingrediar  ad  regem  con- 
tra legem  faciens,  non  vocata, 
tradensque  me  morti  et  peri- 
culo." 

Judith,  VIII.  6. 

" —  et  habens  super  lumbos 
suos  cilicium,  jejunabat  omnibus 
diebus  vitae  suae,  praeter  sab- 
bata,  et  neomenias,  et  festa  do- 
mus  Israel." 


sanguinis  feminae  senes  ad  ig- 
nem  damnavit :  vobis  vero  per 
Danielem  exprobravit  dicens : 
*  Sic  fatui  filii  Israel,  non  dijudi- 
cantes,  neque  quod  manifestum 
est  cognoscentes,  condemnastis 
filiam  Israel  ?  Revertimini  ergo 
ad  judicium,  quia  falsum  testi- 
monium isti  locuti  sunt  adversus 
eam.'" 

Lib.  III.  6. 

"  Quemadmodum  ergo  sapien- 
tissima  Juditha,  pudicitiae  testi- 
monio  Celebris,  nocte  ac  die 
Deum  pro  Israel   deprecabatur." 

Lib.  IV.  6. 

"  —  quia  non  justificabitur 
caupo  de  peccato — ." 


Lib.  IV.  II. 

"Et  adhuc  :  Tunde  latera  ejus, 
dum  infans  est,  ne  forte  indura- 
tus  non  credat  tibi." 


Lib.  V.  20. 

"  Item  Esthera  et  Mardochae- 
us,  et  Juditha  insultationem  im- 
piorum  Holophernis  et  Amanis 
jejunando  declinarunt." 


124 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   CHURCH. 


Eccli.  XXIV.  35. 

"  —  qui  implet  quasi  Phison 
sapientiam,  et  sicut  Tigris  in 
diebus  novorum — ." 


Eccli.  XXV.  36. 

"  A  carnibus  tuis  abscinde  il- 
1am,  ne  semper  te  abutatur." 

Eccli.  V.  8. 

"  Non  tardes  converti  ad  Do- 
minum,  et  ne  differas  de  die  in 
diem  — ." 

Baruch  IV.  4. 

"  Beati  sumus,  Israel  :  quia 
quae  Deo  placent,  manifesta 
sunt  nobis." 

Sap.  III.  I. 

"Justorum  autem  animae  in 
manu  Dei  sunt,  et  non  tanget 
illos  tormentum  mortis." 

Sap,  II.  23 — 24. 

"  Quoniam  Deus  creavit  homi- 
nem  inexterminabilem,  et  ad 
imaginem  similitudinis  suae  fecit 
ilium.  Invidia  autem  diaboli 
mors  introivit  in  orbem  terra- 
rum  :  — ," 

Tob.  IV.  16. 

"  Quod  ab  alio  oderis  fieri  tibi, 
vide,  ne  tu  aliquando  alteri  fa- 
cias." 


Lib.  VI.  5. 

"  —  detractoque  eis  Spiritu 
sancto  ac  imbre  prophetico,  im- 
plevit  ecclesiam  suam  gratia  spi- 
rituali,  velut  fluviura  Aegypti  in 
diebus  novorum" 

Ibid.  14. 

"  Abscinde  enim  eam,"  inquit, 
"a  carnibus  tuis." 

Ibid.  15. 

"  Ne  differas  enim  converti  ad 
Dominum." 


Ibid.  33. 

"Beati  sumus,  Israel,  quia 
quae  placita  sunt  Deo  manifesta 
sunt  nobis." 

Ibid.  30. 

"Justorum  animae  in  manu 
Dei." 


Lib.  VII.  I. 

"  —  naturale  quidem  est  vitae 
iter,  adscitum  autem  iter  mortis  ; 
non  illius  quae  ex  voluntate  Dei 
exstitit,  verum  illius  quae  ex  in- 
sidiis  diaboli." 


Ibid.  2. 

"Omne  quod  non  vis  tibi  fieri, 
et  tu  hoc  alteri  ne  facias." 


Esther  XIV.  12.  Ibid.  33. 

"Memento,  Domine,  et  ostende         "  Aeterne  Salvator  noster,  rex 
te  nobis  in  tempore  tribulationis      deorum." 
nostrae,  et  da  mihi  fiduciam,  Do- 
mine,  rex  deorum   et  universae 
potestatis  — ." 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


12d 


I.  Mac.  II. 


Judith  VIII. 


Dan.  XIII.  42. 

"  Exclamavit  autem  voce  mag- 
na Susanna,  et  dixit :  Deus 
aeterne,  qui  absconditorum  es 
cognitor,  qui  nosti  omnia,  ante- 
quam  fiant — ." 

Judith  VIII. 


Sap.  III.  I. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Ibid.  37. 

"Tu,  Domine  Deus,  nunc  quo- 
que  suscipe  pieces  labiis  prolatis 
populi  tui  congregati  ex  gentibus 

sicut    suscepisti    munera 

justorum  in  eorum  saeculis 

Mathathiae    et   filiorum   ejus  in 
zelo  tuo  — ." 

Lib.  VIII.  2. 

"  Sed  et  mulieres  prophetave- 
runt Holda   et  Juditha." 

Ibid.  5. 

"  Qui  es  here,  Dominus  Deus 
omnipotens, ....  qui  omnia  nosti 
antequam  fiant  — ." 


Ibid.  25. 

"  Vidua  non  ordinatur  ;  sed  si 
multo  ante  amisit  virum,  et  caste 
et  inculpabiliter  vixit,  ac  domes- 
ticorum  optirae  curam  gessit  ut 
Juditha  — ." 

Ibid.  41. 


Eccli.  XXXI.  35. 

"  Vinum  in  jucunditatem  crea- 
tum  est,  et  non  in  ebrietatem,  ab 
initio." 


—  quia  cunctorum  animae 
apud  te  vivent,  et  spiritus  justo- 
rum in  manu  tua  sunt,  quos  non 
tanget  cruciatus." 

Ibid.  44. 

"  Hoc  autem  dicimus  non  ut 
vinum  nequaquam  bibant :  eo 
enim  modo  contumelia  afficerent 
id  quod  a  Deo  factum  est  ad  laeti- 
tiam." 
For  the  tradition  of  the  African  Church,  we  turn  to  the  two 
great  lights  of  that  Church  Tertullian  and  Cyprian.* 

*Quintus  Septimius  Florens  TertuUianus  was  the  son  of  a  centurion  in  the 
Roman  armies  stationed  in  Proconsular  Africa.  It  appears  evident  that  he 
had  first  given  himself  to  a  forensic  career.  The  faith  and  constancy  of  the 
Martyrs  impressed  him  deeply,  and  in  the  fourth  year  of  the  reign  of  Septimius 
Severus  he  embraced  the  faith  of  Jesus  Christ.  At  Carthage  he  was  ordained 
priest,  and  passed  thence  to  Rome,  where  he  published  his  Apology  for  the 
Christians,    a    masterpiece    of    erudition    and   eloquence.     Tertullian   was 


126  THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 

Dan.  XIII.  32.  Tertull.  De  Corona  IV.  A 

"  At   iniqui    illi    jusserunt   ut  "  Si  et  Susanna  in  judicio  re- 

discooperiretur  (erat  enim  coo-  velata  argumentum  velandi  prae- 

perta)  ut  vel  sic  satiarentur  de-  stat — ." 
core  ejus." 

Adversus  Hermogenem  XXI. 
II.  Mac.  VII.  28.  A. 

"  Peto,   nate,   ut    aspicias    ad  "  Ita  si  ex  nihilo  Deus  cuncta 

caelum  et  terrain,  et  ad   omnia      fecisse  non  potuit,  Scriptura  non 
quae  in  eis  sunt :  et  intelligas,      adjecisset    ilium    ex    nihilo   fe- 
quia  ex  nihilo  fecit  ilia  Deus,  et      cisse — ." 
hominum  genus — ." 

Ibid.  XLIV. 

An    evident    allusion    to    the  "  — cui  etiam  inanimalia  et  in- 

Benedictus    of     Dan.     III.      corporalia  laudes    canunt   apud 
24, — 90.  Danielem." 

endowed  by  nature  with  a  capacious  mind,  endowed  with  a  peculiar  ardor  and 
natural  severity.  For  some  years  he  used  his  splendid  powers  for  the  best 
interests  of  the  Christian  Church.  He  was  naturally  inclined  to  that  which 
was  rigorous.  He  seemed  to  find  a  lack  of  severity  in  the  Gospels  of  the 
Christian  dispensation.  This  natural  impetuosity  made  him  a  prey  to  the 
fanatic  Montanus.  A  very  probable  opinion  sustains  that  baffled  ambition, 
and  the  opposition  of  the  clergy  of  Rome,  conspired  to  cause  his  defection. 
Montanus  pretended  that  Grod,  having  failed  to  save  the  world  by  Moses,  the 
Prophets,  and  even  by  the  Incarnation,  had  sent  the  Holy  Spirit  into  him  to 
execute  the  salvation  of  the  elect.  He  associated  with  himself  Priscilla  and 
Maximilla,  two  women  of  high  rank  but  of  immoral  lives.  They  affected 
great  austerity,  and  rigid  fasts.  They  forbade  second  marriages,  denied  the 
absolving  power  of  the  Church  for  certain  sins,  and  considered  flight  from 
persecution  as  apostasy.  They  laid  claim  to  prophecy,  inveighed  against  the 
hierarchy  of  the  Church,  proclaimed  that  they  were  to  raise  the  Christians 
from  their  spiritual  infancy  in  which  they  had  hitherto  lived.  The  apparent 
severity  of  their  morals  drew  many  to  the  sect,  but  being  founded  on  a 
violent  misconception,  it  failed.  Montanus  is  said  by  Eusebius  to  have  hanged 
himself.  The  last  years  of  TertuUian's  life  were  spent  in  this  wretched 
heresy,  and  he  wrote  many  of  his  works  while  a  Montanist.  There  is  no  good 
evidence  that  he  ever  abandoned  the  error.  TertuUian's  works  may  be 
divided  into  two  classes  :  those  written  before  his  lapse  into  Montanism,  and 
those  written  after.  ■  The  first  class  includes  Apologia  pro  Christianis,  Libri 
duo  ad  Nationes,  De  Testimonio  Animae,  ad  Martyres,  De  Spectaculis,  De 
Idololatria,  Ad  Scapidam,  De  Oratione,  De  Baptismo,  De  Poenitentia,  De 
Patientia,  Ad  Uxorem,  libri  duo,  De  Cultu  Feminarum,  lib.  H.  In  the 
second  class  are  De  Corona  Militis,  De  Fuga  in  Persecutione,  Adversus 
Gnosticos,  Adversus  Praxeam,  Adversus  Hermogenen,  Adversus  Marcionem, 
lib.  v.,  Adversus  Valentinianos,  Adversus  Judseos,  De  Anima,  De  Came 
Christi,  De  Resurrectione  Carnis,  De  Velandis  Virginibus,  De  Exhortatione 
Castitatis,  De  Monogamia,  De  Jejuniis,  De  Pudicitia,  De  Pallio. 

It  is  uncertain  whether  the  work  De  Praescriptionibus  was  written  before 
or  after  his  defection. 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


127 


Judith  passim. 


Eccli.  XI.  14. 

"  Bona  et  mala,  vita  et  mors, 
paupertas  et  honestas  a  Deo 
sunt." 


Dan.  III.  24 — 90. 


Sap.  I.  I, 

Diligitejustitiam,  qui  judicatis 
terram.  Sentite  de  Domino  in 
bonitate,  et  in  simplicitate  cordis 
quaerite  ilium. 

Eccli.  XLIV.  17. 

"  Noe  inventus  est  perfectus, 
Justus,  et  in  tempore  iracundiae 
factus  est  reconciliatio." 

I.  Mac.  passim. 


Sap.  I.  6. 

"  Benignus  est  enim  spiritus 
sapientiae,  et  non  liberabit  male- 
dicum  a  labiis  suis  :  quoniam 
renum  illius  testis  est  Deus,  et 
cordis  illius  scrutator  est  verus, 
et  linguae  ejus  auditor." 


Adversus  Marcionem,  Lib.  I. 
VII. 

"  Si  communio  nominum  con- 
ditionibus  praejudicat,  quanti 
nequam  servi  regum  nominibus 
insultant,  Alexandri,  et  Darii  et 
Holophernis  ?" 

Ibid.  XVI. 

"  Cur  in  hac  sola  specie  uni- 
formem  eum  capiunt,  visibilium 
solummodo  et  vitam  et  mortem  et 
mala  et pacem." 

Adversus  Marcionem,  Lib.  V. 
II. 

"  Quod  non  alius  quam  Creator 
intelligetur  qui  et  universa  bene- 
dixit,  habes  Genesim  ;  et  ab  uni- 
versis  benedicitur,  habes  Dan- 
ielem." 

Adversus  Valentinianos  II. 

"  Porro  facies  Dei  spectat  in 
simplicitate  quaerentes,  ut  docet 
ipsa  Sophia,  non  quidem  Valen- 
tini  sed  Salomonis." 

Adversus  Judaeos  II. 

*'  Nam  unde  JVoe  Justus  inven- 
tus—V 

Ibid.  IV. 

"  Nam  et  temporibus  Maccab- 
aeorum,  Sabbatis  pugnando,  for- 
titer  fecerunt,  et  hostes  allophylos 
expugnaverunt,  legemque  pater- 
nam  ad  pristinum  vitae  statum, 
pugnando  Sabbatis,  revocave- 
runt." 

De  Anima  XV. 

"  Si  enim  scrutatorem  et  dis- 
pectorem  cordis  Deum  legi- 
mus — ." 


128 


THE  CANON   OF  THE   CHURCH. 


Eccli.  XV.  1 8. 

"  Ante  hominem  vita  et  mors, 
bonum  et  malum  :  quod  placu- 
erit  ei,  dabitur  illi — ." 

Baruch  VI.  3 — 5. 

"  Nunc  autem  videbitis  in 
Babylonia  deos  aureos,  et  argen- 
teos,  et  lapideos,  et  ligneos  in 
humeris  portari,  ostentantes  me- 
tum  Gentibus.  Videte  ergo  ne 
et  vos  similes  efiiciamini  factis 
alienis,  et  metuatis,  et  metus  vos 
capiat  in  ipsis.  Visa  itaque  turba 
de  retro,  et  ab  ante,  adorantes, 
dicite  in  cordibus  vestris :  Te 
oportet  adorari,  Domine." 


Dan.  XIV.  3,  24. 

"  Rex  quoque  colebat  eura,  et 
ibat  per  singulos  dies  adorare 
eum :  porro  Daniel  adorabat 
Deum  suum,  Dixitque  ei  rex : 
Quare  non  adoras  Bel  ?  Dixit- 
que Daniel  :  Dominum  Deum 
meum  adoro  :  quia  ipse  est  Deus 
vivens  :  iste  autem  non  est  Deus 
vivens." 

Sap.  I.  I. 

(Already  quoted.) 


De  Monogamia  XIV. 

"  Ecce,  inquit,  posui  ante  te 
bonum  et  malum:  elige  quod 
bonum  est." 

Adversus  Gnosticos  VIII. 

"  Meminerant  enim  et  Jere- 
miae  scribentis  ad  eos  quibus 
ilia  captivitas  imminebat :  *  Et 
nunc  videbitis  deos  Babyloni- 
orum  aureos  et  argenteos  et  lig- 
neos portari  super  humeros,  os- 
tentantes nationibus  timorem. 
Cavete  igitur  ne  et  vos  consimiles 
sitis  allophylis,  et  timore  capia- 
mini,  dum  aspicitis  turbas  ado- 
rantes retro  eos  et  ante :  sed 
dicite  in  animo  vestro  :  te,  Do- 
mine, adorare  debemus.' " 

De  Idololatria  XVIII. 

" — statimque  apparuisset  Dan- 
ielem  idolis  non  deservisse,  nee 
Bel  nee  draconem  eolere,  quod 
multo  postea  apparuit." 


De  Praescriptionibus  VII. 

'*  Nostra  institutio  de  porticu 
Salomonis  est,  qui  et  ipse  tradid- 
erat,  Dominum  in  simplicitate 
cordis  esse  quaerendum." 


*Closely  allied  with  Tertullian,  is  St.  Cyprian.  He  declares  himself  that 
TertuUian  had  been  his  master.  The  style  of  Tertullian  is  rough,  and  tinged 
with  certain  African  barbarisms.  In  the  words  of  Balzac  :  ' '  Tertullian's  is 
an  iron  style,  but  it  must  be  allowed  that  with  this  metal  he  has  forged 
excellent  weapons. "  Cyprian  tempers  the  roughness  of  his  master,  but  still 
he  retains  much  of  the  genius  of  his  country.  He  has  been  called  by  Lactan- 
tius  the  first  eloquent  father  of  the  Latin  Church.  Cyprian  was  descended 
from  an  illustrious,  rich  family  in  Proconsular  Africa  in  the  first  half  of  the 
third  century.  As  a  pagan,  he  first  devoted  himself  to  eloquence.  He  was 
converted  through  the  labors  of  the  priest  Csecilius  in  246,  A.  D.  He  sold 
what  he  had,  and  gave  to  the  poor,  embraced  continency,  took  the  habit  of  a 
philosopher,  and  substituted  the  reading  of  the  Sacred  Scriptures  for  that  of 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


129 


Eccli.  XI.  30. 

"  Ante  mortem  ne  laudes  hom- 
inem  quemquam,  quoniam  in 
filiis  suis  agnoscitur  vir." 

Dan.  XI 11. 


Cyprian.  Epist.  V.  2, 

"  — cum  scriptum  sit :  '  Ante 
mortem  ne  laudes  hominem 
quemquam.' " 

Idem.  Epist.  XL.  4. 

"Nee  aetas  vos  eorum,  nee 
auetoritas  fallat,  qui  ad  duorum 
presbyterorum  veterem  nequi- 
tiam  respondentes,  sicut  illi  Su- 
sannam  pudicam  eorrumpere  et 
violare  conati  sunt,  sieet  hi,  ete." 

Idem.  Epist.  LXII.  i. 

" —  et  iterum  scriptum  sit: 
'  Disciplinam  qui  abjicit  infelix 
est.'" 


Idem.  Epist.  LXVI. 

"Et  iterum  (Salomon):  '  Ho- 
nora  Deum  ex  tota  anima  tua,  et 
honorifica  sacerdotes  ejus.'  " 


Sap.  III.  II. 

"  Sapientiam  enim  et  discipli- 
nam qui  abjicit,  infelix  est :  et 
vacua  est  spes  illorum,  et  labores 
sine  fructu,  et  inutilia  opera  eo- 
rum." 

Eceli.  VII.  29,  31. 

" —  honora  patrem  tuum,  et 
gemitus  matris  tuae  ne  oblivis- 
caris  — .  In  tota  anima  tua  time 
Dominum,  et  sacerdotes  illius 
sanctifica." 

Eccli.  XXVIII.  28.  Idem.  LXIX.  7. 

"  Sepi  aures   tuas   spinis,   lin-  "  —   nee   recordaris    scriptum 

guam  nequam  noli  audire,   et  ori  esse  :  '  Sepi  aures  tuas  spinis,  et 

tuo  facito  ostia  et  seras."  noli  audire  linguam   nequam.*" 

the  profane  authors.  His  great  talents  placed  him  in  the  Episcopal  see  of 
Carthage  in  348.  His  labors  in  the  see  of  Carthage  were  immense.  He  was 
the  father  of  the  poor,  the  light  of  the  clergy,  and  the  consoler  of  the  people. 
The  Decian  Persecution  forced  him  to  flee  from  his  see  for  some  years,  but  he 
again  returned  to  his  post.  The  character  of  Cyprian  was  firm  and  uncom- 
promising. When  he  was  accused  before  Pope  Cornelius  by  Privatus,  he 
sent  no  defense  to  Rome.  To  the  Pope,  who  asked  an  explanation  of  this,  he 
responded,  that  it  was  established  among  the  Bishops  that  a  crime  should  be 
examined  where  it  was  committed.  This  natural  firmness  led  Cyprian  to 
oppose  Pope  Stephen  in  the  celebrated  question  of  the  baptism  by  heretics. 
The  only  justification  that  can  be  offered  for  Cyprian  is,  that  the  Pope's 
province  in  the  Church  was  not  so  well  understood  then  as  now.  Hatred  of 
heresy  led  him  into  an  error  that  was  by  no  means  formal.  He  suffered 
martyrdom  for  the  faith  in  258.  Whatever  was  blameworthy  in  his  conten- 
tion with  Pope  Stephen  was  washed  out  in  the  blood  of  martyrdom.  He  was 
a  prolific  writer.  His  chief  works  are :  Eighty -three  Epistles,  De  Habitu 
Virginis,  De  Lapsis,  De  Unitate  Ecclesiae,  Ad  Demetrianum,  De  Idolorum 
Vanitate,  De  Mortalitate,  De  Opere  et  Eleemosynis,  De  Bono  Patientise,  De 
Zelo  et  Livore,  Ad  Fortunatum,  Ad  Quirinum. 
I 


130 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


Eccli.  XXXIV.  30. 

"Qui  baptizatur  a  mortuo,  et 
iterum  tangit  eum  ;  quid  proficit 
lavatio  illius  ? " 

Sap.  III.  4—8. 

"Etsi  coram  hominibus  tor- 
menta  passi  sunt,  spes  illorum 
immortalitate  plena  est.  In  pau- 
cis  vexati,  in  multis  bene  dispo- 
nentur,  quoniam  Deus  tentavit 
eos,  et  invenit  illos  dignos  se. 
Tamquam  aurum  in  fornace  pro- 
bavit  illos,  et  quasi  holocausti 
hostiam  accepit  illos,  et  in  tem- 
pore erit  respectus  illorum." 

Sap.  III.  II. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Sap.  V.  8,  9. 

"  Quid  nobis  profuit  superbia  ? 
aut  divitiarum  jactantia  quid 
contulit  nobis  ?  Transierunt  om- 
nia ilia  tamquam  umbra,  et  tam- 
quam nuntius  percurrens  — ." 

Dan.  XIV.  30  et  seqq. 

"  Qui  miserunt  eum  in  lacum 
leonum  ;  et  erat  ibi  diebus  sex." 


Tob.  XII.  7. 

**  Etenim  sacramentum  regis 
abscondere  bonum  est :  opera 
autem  Dei  revelare  et  confiteri, 
honorificum  est." 

Sap.  V.  1—9. 

"  Tunc  stabunt  justi  in  magna 
constantia  adversus  eos,  qui  se 
angustiaverunt,  et  qui  abstule- 
runt  labores  eorum,  etc." 


Idem.  Epist.  LXXI.  1. 

" —  non  considerantes  scrip- 
tum  esse  :  '  Qui  baptizatur  a 
mortuo,  quid  proficit  lavatio 
ejus  ?' " 

Idem.  Epist.  LXXXI.  2. 

Et  iterum  ubi  loquitur  Scrip- 
tura  divina  de  tormentis  quae 
Martyres  Dei  consecrant,  et  in 
ipsa  possessionis  probatione  sanc- 
tificant :  '  Et  si  coram  homini- 
bus tormenta  passi  sunt,  spes 
eorum  immortalitate  plena  est. 
Et  in  paucis  vexati  in  multis 
bene  disponentur  — .'  " 

De  Habitu  Virginum  I. 
"  Et  denuo  legimus  :  '  Discip- 
linam  qui  abjicit,  infelix  est.'  " 

Ibidem,  X. 

" —  cum  dicat  Scriptura  di- 
vina :  *  Quid  nobis  profuit  su- 
perbia ?  aut  quid  divitiarum  jac- 
tatio  contulit  nobis  ?  Transierunt 
omnia  ilia  tamquam  umbra.'  " 

De  Oratione  Dominica  XXI. 

"Sic  Danieli  in  leonum  lacu 
jussu  regis  incluso  prandium  di- 
vinitus  procuratur,  et  inter  feras 
esurientes  et  parcentes  homo  Dei 
pascitur." 

Ibid.  XXXIII. 

"  Sic  et  Raphael  angelus  To- 
biae  oranti  semper,  et  semper 
operanti  testis  fuitdicens:  'Opera 
Dei  revelare  et  confiteri,  honori- 
ficum est  — .'  " 

De  Idolorum  Vanitate,  XXIV. 

"  Et  iterum  (dicit  Sancta  Scrip- 
tura): 'Tunc  stabunt  justi  in 
magna  constantia  adversus  eos 
qui  se  angustiaverunt,  etc'  " 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


131 


Eccli.  II.  I,  4,  5. 

"  Fili,  accedens  ad  servitutem 
Dei,  sta  in  justitia  et  timore,  et 
praepara  animam  tuam  ad  tenta- 
tionem.  Omne  quod  tibi  appli- 
citum  fuerit,  accipe,  et  in  dolore 
sustine,  et  in  humilitate  tua  pa- 
tientiam  habe  :  quoniam  in  igne 
probatur  aurum  et  argentum, 
homines  vero  receptibiles,  in  ca- 
mino  humiliationis." 

Tob.  II.  i6. 

"Ubi  est  spes  tua,  pro  qua 
eleemosynas,  et  sepulturas  facie- 
bas?" 


Tob.  XII.  II— 15. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Eccli.  III.  33. 

"  Ignera  ardentem  extinguit 
aqua,  et  eleemosyna  resistit  pec- 
catis — ." 

Tob.  XII.  8. 

"  Bona  est  oratio  cum  jejunio, 
et  eleemosyna  magis  quam  the- 
sauros  auri  recondere — ." 


Tob.  XIV.  10— I L 

"  Audite  ergo,  filii  mei,  patrem 
vestrum  :  Servite  Domino  in  ver- 
itate,  et  inquirite  ut  faciatis  quae 
placita  sunt  illi :  et  filiis  vestris 
mandate  ut  faciant  justitias  et 
eleemosynas,  ut  sint  memores 
Dei,  et  benedicant  eum  in  omni 
tempore  in  veritate,  et  in  tota 
virtu te  sua." 


De  Mortalitate,  IX. 

"  Docet  et  praemonet  Scrip- 
tura  divina  dicens  :  *  Fili,  acced- 
ens ad  servitutem  Dei,  sta  in 
justitia  et  timore,  et  praepara 
animam   tuam  ad    tentationem. 

Et  iterum  :  *  In  dolore  sustine, 
et  in  humilitate  tua  patientiam 
habe,  quoniam  in  igne  probatur 
aurum  et  argentum,  homines  vero 
receptibiles,  in  camino  humilia- 
tionis.' " 

Ibid.  X. 

"  Et  Tobias  post  opera  mag- 

nifica    quern  et    ipsum 

uxor  depravare  tentavit  dicens  : 

*  Ubi  sunt  justitiae  tuae  ?    Ecce 
quae  pateris.'" 

Ibid. 

"Quem  postmodum  Raphael 
Angelus     collaudat,     et    dicit  : 

*  Opera  Dei  revelare  et  confiteri 
honorificum  est — .'  " 

De  Opere  et  Eleemosynis  II. 

"  Item  denuo  dicit:  'Sicut  aqua 
extinguit  ignem,  sic  eleemosyna 
extinguit  peccatum.'  " 

Ibid.  V. 

"  Raphael  quoque  Angelus. . , 
hortatur  dicens  :  *  Bona  est  ora- 
tio cum  jejunio  et  eleemosyna, 
quia  eleemosyna  a  morte  liberat 
et  ipsa  purgat  peccata.'  " 

Ibid.  XX. 

"  Et  nunc,  fili,  mando  tibi  : 
'servi  Deo  in  veritate  et  fac  coram 
illo  quod  illi  placet :  et  filiis 
manda  ut  faciant  justitiam  et 
eleemosynas,  et  sint  memores  Dei, 
et  benedicant  nomen  ejus  omni 
tempore.'  " 


132 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


Tob.  IV.  2—16. 

"  — dixitque  ei :  Audi,  fili  mi, 
verba  oris  mei,  et  ea  in  corde 
tuo,  quasi  fundamentum  con- 
strue  Omnibus  autem  die- 
bus  vitae  tuae  in  mente  habeto 
Deum :  et  cave  ne  aliquando 
peccato  consentias,  et  praeter- 
mittas  praecepta  Domini  Dei 
nostri,  etc." 


Ibid. 

"  Et  iterum  :  *  Omnibus  diebus 
vitae  tuae,  fili  dilectissime,  in 
mente  habeto  Deum  :  et  cave  ne 
aliquando  peccato  consentias,  et 
praecepta  Domini  Dei  nostri, 
cet.'" 


Eccli.  II.  4. 

"  Omne,  quod  tibi  applicitum 
fuerit,  accipe  :  et  in  dolore  sus- 
tine,  et  in  humilitate  tua  patien- 
tiam  habe — ." 


De  Dono  Patientiae  XVII. 

"  —  sicut  scriptum  est :  *  In 
dolore  sustine,  et  in  humilitate 
tua  patientiam  habe,  quoniam  in 
igne  probatur  aurum  et  argen- 
tum.'  " 


Tob.  Passim. 


Ibid.  XVIII. 

"  Tobias  quoque  post  justitiae 
et  misericordiae  suae  opera  mag- 
nifica,  luminum  amissione  ten- 
tatus,  in  quantum  patienter  cae- 
citatem  pertulit,  intantum  gran- 
diter  Deum  patientiae  laude 
promeruit." 


Sap.  XV.  15—17. 

"  — quoniam  omnia  idola  na- 
tionum  deos  aestimaverunt,  etc." 


De  Exhortatione  Martyrii  I. 

"  In  Sapientia  Salomonis  : 
*  Omnia  idola  nationum  aestima- 
verunt deos — ." 


Sap.  XIII.  1—4. 

"Vani  autem  sunt  omnes  ho- 
mines, in  quibus  non  subest 
scientia  Dei :  et  de  his,  quae 
videntur  bona,  non  potuerunt 
intelligere  eum,  qui  est,  neque 
operibus  attendentes  agnoverunt 
quis  esset  artifex  :  sed  aut  ig- 
nem,  aut  spiritum,  aut  citatum 
aerem,  aut  gyrum  stellarum,  aut 
nimiam  aquam,  aut  solem  et 
lunam,   rectores    orbis   terrarum 


Ibid. 

"  Item  apud  Salomonem  de 
elementis  :  '  Neque  opera  attend- 
entes agnoverunt,  quis  esset  arti- 
fex :  sed  aut  ignem,  aut  spiritum, 
aut  citatum  aerem,  ant  gyrum 
stellarum,  aut  nimiam  aquam, 
aut  solem  et  lunam,  rectores  orbis 
terrarum  deos  putaverunt.  Quo- 
rum si  specie  delectati  deos  puta- 
verunt, sciant,  quanto  his  domi- 
nator  eorum  speciosior  est  :  spe- 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   CHURCH. 


133 


deos  putaverunt.  Quorum  si 
specie  delectati,  deos  putaverunt: 
sciant  quanto  his  dominator 
eorum  speciosior  est ;  speciei 
enim  generator  haec  omnia  con- 
stituit.  Aut  si  virtutem,  et  opera 
eorum  mirati  sunt,  intelligant  ab 
illis,  quoniam  qui  haec  fecit, 
fortior  est  illis — ." 


ciei  enim  generator  haec  omnia 
constituit.  Aut,  si  virtutem  et 
opera  eorum  mirati  sunt,  intelli- 
gant ab  illis,  quoniam  qui  haec 
fecit,  fortior  est  illis.'  " 


Eccli.  II.  5. 

"  — quoniam  in  igne  probatur 
aurum  et  argentum,  homines 
vero  receptibiles,  in  camino  hu- 
miliationis." 


Ad  Fortunatum  IX. 

"Et  iterum  apud  Salomonem: 
*  Vasa  figuli  probat  fornax ;  et 
homines  justos,  tentatio  tribula- 
tionis.'  " 


Dan.  XIV.  4. 

"  Qui  respondens,  ait  ei :  Quia 
non  colo  idola  manufacta,  sed 
viventem  Deum,  qui  creavit 
caelum,  et  terram,  et  habet  po- 
testatem  omnis  carnis." 


Ibid.  XI. 

"  Et  Daniel,  Deo  devotus  et 
Sancto  Spiritu  plenus,  exclamat 
et  dicit :  *  Nihil  colo  ego  nisi 
Dominum  Deum  meum,  qui 
condidit  coelum  et  terram.'  " 


Tob.  XIII.  6. 

"  Aspicite  ergo  quae  fecit  no- 
biscum,  et  cum  timore  et  tremore 
confitemini  illi :  regemque  saecu- 
lorum  exaltate  in  operibus  ves- 
tris." 


Ibid. 

"  Tobias  quoque. . .  .praedicat 
dicens:  *  Ego  in  terra  captivitatis 
meae  confiteor  illi,  et  ostendo 
virtutem  ejus  in  natione  pecca- 
trice.'  " 


II.  Mac.  VII.  9. 

" — et  in  ultimo  spiritu  consti- 
tutus,  sic  ait :  Tu  quidem  scele- 
stissime,  in  praesenti  vita  nos 
perdis  :  sed  Rex  mundi  defunc- 
tos  nos  pro  suis  legibus  in 
aeternae  vitae  resurrectione  sus- 
citabit." 


11.  Mac.  VII.  I— 41. 


Ibid. 

"  At  ille  (Martyr  Maccabaicus) 
in  martyrio  suo  fidens,  et  resur- 
rectionis  sibi  praemium  de  Dei 
remuneratione  promittens,  ex- 
clamavit  et  dixit :  '  Tu  quidem 
impotens,  ex  hac  presenti  vita 
nos  perdis,  sed  mundi  rex  de- 
functos  nos  pro  suis  legibus  in 
aeternam  vitae  resurrectionem 
suscitabit.'  " 

Prosequitur  et  refert  mortem 
septem  Fratrum  et  matris  eor- 
um. 


134 


THE  CANON  OF   THE  CHURCH. 


II.  Mac.  VI.  30. 

"  Sed,  cum  plagis  perimeretur, 
ingemuit,  et  dixit  :  Domine,  qui 
habes  sanctam  scientiam,  mani- 
feste  tu  scis,  quia,  cum  a  morte 
possem  liberari,  duros  corporis 
sustineo  dolores  :  secundum  ani- 
mam  vero  propter  timorem  tuum 
libenter  haec  patior." 

Sap.  III.  4—8. 

"  Etsi  corum  hominibus,  etc." 


Sap.  V.  I — 9. 

"  Tunc  stabunt  justi  in  magna 
constantia  adversus  eos,  qui  se 
angustiaverunt,  etc." 


Tob.  XII.  15. 

"  Ego  enim  sum  Raphael  An- 
gelus,  unus  ex  septem,  qui  ad- 
stamus  ante  Dorainum." 

Eccli.  XXIV.  5—26. 

"  Ego  ex  ore  Altissimi  prodivi 
primogenita  ante  omnem  creatu- 
ram  :  ego  feci  in  coelis,  etc." 


Sap.  II.  12 — 17. 

"  Circumveniamus  ergo  jus- 
tum,  etc." 

Tob.  II.  2. 

"  —  dixit  filio  suo  :  Vade,  et 
adduc  aliquos  de  tribu  nostra, 
timentes  Deum,  ut  epulentur  no- 
biscum.' 


Ibid. 

"  At  ille  (Eleazar)  ingemiscens 
ait :  '  Domine,  qui  sanctam 
habes  scientiam,  manifestum  est 
quia  cum  possem  a  morte  libe- 
rari, durissimos  dolores  corporis 
tolero,  flagellis  vapulans  ;  animo 
autem  propter  tui  ipsius  metum 
libenter  haec  patior.' " 

Ibid.  XII. 

Per  Salomonem  Spiritus 
Sanctus  ostendit,  et  praecinit 
dicens  :  *  Et  si  coram  homini- 
bus, etc' " 

Ibid. 

"  Item  apud  eundem  vindicta 

nostra  describitur :    *  Tunc 

stabunt  justi  in  magna  constan- 
tia adversus  eos  qui  se  angustia- 
verunt, etc'  " 

Ad  Quirinum  (Vocantur  quo- 

que  hi  tres  libri,  Testimonia 

adversus  Judaeos)  Lib.  I.  XX. 

"  — ut  angeli  septem  qui  assis- 

tunt  et  conversantur  ante  faciem 

Dei,   sicut   Raphael   angelus    in 

Tobia  dicit." 

Ibid.  Lib.  II.  I. 

Item  apud  eundem  Salomonem 
in  Ecclesiastico:  'Ego  ex  ore  Al- 
tissimi prodivi,  primogenita  ante 
omnem  creaturam.  Ego  in  coelis 
feci,  etc' " 

Ibid.  Lib.  II.  XIV. 

"  In  SapientiaSalomonis  :  'Cir- 
cumveniamus justum,  etc' " 

Ibid.  Lib.  IIL  I. 

"  De  hoc  ipso  apud  Tobiam  : 
*  Et  dixit  Tobias  filio  suo  :  Vade 
et  adduc  quemcumque  pauperem 
inveneris  ex  fratribus  nostris,  qui 
tamen  in  mente  habeat  Deum  ex 
toto  corde  suo,     Hunc  adduc,  et 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


135 


Tob.  IV.  5— II. 

"  Cum  autem  et  ipsa  comple- 
verit  tempus  vitae  suae,  sepelias 
earn  circa  me.  Omnibus  autem 
diebus  vitae  tuae,  in  mente  ha- 
beto,  etc." 

II.  Mac.  XL  12. 

" —  et  cum  nee  ipse  jam  foe- 
torem  suum  ferre  posset,  ita  ait : 
Justum  est,  subditum  esse  Deo, 
et  mortalem  non  paria  Deo  sen- 
tire." 

I.  Mac.  II.  62 — 63. 

**  Et  a  verbis  viri  peccatoris  ne 
timueritis,  quia  gloria  ejus  ster- 
cus  et  vermis  est.  Hodie  extoUitur, 
et  eras  non  invenietur  :  quia  con- 
versus  est  in  terram  suam,  et 
cogitatio  ejus  periit." 

Eccli.  XXVII.  6. 

"  Vasa  figuli  probat  fornax;  et 
homines  justos,  tentatio  tribula- 
tionis." 

Tob.  II.  22. 

"  Ad  haec  uxor  ejus  irata  re- 
spondit :  Manifeste  vana  facta 
est  spes  tua,  et  eleemosynae  tuae 
modo  apparuerunt." 

Eccli.  XXIII.  II. 

"  Sicut  enim  servus  interroga- 
tus  assidue,  a  livore  non  minui- 
tur,  sic  omnis  jurans,  et  nomi- 
nans,  in  toto  a  peccato  non 
purgabitur," 

Sap.  III.  4. 

(Oft  quoted.) 


manducabit  pariter  meum  pran- 
dium  hoc  :  Ecce  sustineo  te,  fili, 
donee  venias.' " 

Ibid. 

"  Item  illic  :  *  Omnibus  diebus 
vitae  tuae,  fili,  Deum  in  mente 
habe,  etc' " 


Ibid.  IV. 

"  De  hoc  ipso  in  Maccabaeis  : 
'  Justum  est  subditum  Deo  esse, 
et  mortalem  non  paria  Deo  sen- 
tire.'  " 

Ibid. 

"  Item  illic  :  *  Et  verba  viri 
peccatoris  ne  timueritis,  quia 
gloria  ejus,  in  stercora  erit,  et  in 
vermes.  Hodie  extollitur,  et  eras 
non  invenietur  :  quoniam  eon- 
versus  est  in  terram  suam,  et 
cogitatio  ejus  periit.' " 

Ibid.  VI. 

"Apud  Salomonem :  'Vasa 
figuli  probat  fornax  ;  et  homines 
justos,  tentatio  tribulationis.'  " 

Ibid. 

"  De  hoc  ipso  in  Tobia  :  *  Ubi 
sunt  justitiae  tuae  ?  Ecce  quae 
pateris.'  " 

Ibid.  XII. 

"  Apud  Salomonem  :  '  Vir  mul- 
tum  jurans  replebitur  iniquitate, 
et  non  diseedet  a  domo  ejus 
plaga  ;  et  si  vane  juraverit,  non 
justificabitur.'" 

Ibid.  XV. 

"  De  hoc  ipso  in  Sapientia  Sa- 
lomonis  :  '  Et  si  coram  homini- 
bus,  etc.'  "     (Oft  quoted). 


186 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   CHURCH. 


I.  Mac.  II.  52. 

"Abraham,  nonne  in  tentatione 
inventus  est  fidelis,  et  reputatum 
est  ei  ad  justitiam  ?" 

Sap.  V.  1—9. 

(Oft  quoted.) 


II.  Mac.  VII.  9—19. 
(Oft  quoted.) 


Eccli.  I.  16. 

"  Initium  sapientiae,  timor  Do- 
mini ;  et  cum  fidelibus  in  vulva 
concreatus  est,  cum  electis  femi- 
nis  graditur,  et  cum  justis  et  fide- 
libus agnoscitur." 

Dan.  XIII.  1—3. 


Eccli.  X.  29. 

"  Noli  extoUere  te  in  faciendo 
opere  tuo,  et  noli  cunctari  in 
tempore  angustiae." 

Sap.  I.  I. 

"  Diligite  justitiam,  qui  judica- 
tis  terram.  Sentite  de  Domino 
in  bonitate,  et  in  simplicitate 
cordis  quaerite  ilium  — ." 

I.  Mac.  II.  60, 

"  Daniel  in  sua  simplicitate 
liberatus  est  de  ore  leonum." 


Ibid. 

"  De  hoc  ipso  in  Maccabaeis  : 

*  Abraham,  nonne  in  tentatione 
inventus  est  fidelis,  et  deputatum 
est  ei  ad  justitiam  ?*  " 

Ibid.  XVI. 

"Item  (Salomon)  illic  :  'Tunc 
stabunt  justi  in  magna,  etc' " 
(Oft  quoted). 

Ibid.  XVII. 

"  De  hoc  ipso  in  Maccabaeis  : 

*  Domine,  qui  sanctam  habes 
scientiam,  etc' "      (Oft  quoted). 

Ibid.  XX. 

"  De  hoc  ipso  in  Sapientia  Sa- 
lomonis  :  *  Initium  Sapientiae 
metuere  Deura.' " 


Ibid. 

"  Item  in  Danieli :  *  Fuit  vir 
habitans  in  Babylonia  cui  nomen 
erat  Joachim,  et  accepit  uxorem 
nomine  Susannam,  filiam  Hel- 
ciae,  formosam  valde  ac  timen- 
tem  Deum,  et  erant  parentes  ejus 
justi  et  docuerunt  filiam  suam 
secundum  legem  Moysi.'  " 

Ibid.  XLI. 

"Apud  Salomonem  in  Eccle- 
siastico :  *  Noli  te  extollere  in 
faciendo  opere  tuo.'  " 

Ibid.  LIII. 

"  Item  apud  Salomonem  in  Sa- 
pientia :  '  Et  in  simplicitate  cor- 
dis quaerite  ilium.' " 


Ibid. 

"Item  in  Maccabaeis  :  'Daniel 
in  sua  simplicitate  liberatus  est 
de  ore  leonum.'  " 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   CHURCH, 


137 


Sap.  IV.  II,  14. 

"  — raptus  est  ne  malitia  muta- 
ret  intellectum  ejus,  aut  ne  fictio 
deciperet  animam  illius.  Placita 
enim  erat  Deo  anima  illius,  etc." 

Sap.  XV.  15—17. 

"Omnia  idola  nationum,  etc." 


Sap.  XIII.  1—4. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Tob.  IV.  12  (juxta  Graecum.) 

"  Uxorem   accipe    ex    semine 

parentum  tuorum,  et  noli  sumere 

alienam  mulierem  quae  non  est 

ex  tribu  parentum  tuorum." 

Sap.  III.  II. 

"  Disciplinam  qui  abjicit,  infe- 
lix  est." 

Eccli.  IX.  22. 

*'  Viri  justi  sint  tibi  convivae, 
et  in  timore  Dei  sit  tibi  gloria- 
tio." 


Ibid.  LVIII. 

"  Item  in  Sapientia  Salomonis: 
'  Raptus  est  ne  malitia  mutaret 
intellectum  ejus.  Placita  enim 
erat  Deo  anima  illius.'  " 

Ibid.  LIX. 

"  In  Sapientia  Salomonis  : 
'  Omnia  idola  naticnum,  etc'  " 
(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid. 

"  De  hoc  ipso  :  '  Neque  opera 
attendentes  cognoverunt,  etc'  " 
(Already  quoted.) 

Ibid.  LXII. 

"  Apud  Tobiam:  *  Uxorem  ac- 
cipe ex  semine  parentum  tuorum, 
et  noli  sumere  alienam  mulierem 
quae  non  est  ex  tribu  parentum 
tuorum.'  " 

Ibid.  LXVI. 

"  Item  in  Sapientia  Salomonis: 
*  Disciplinam  qui  abjicit,  infelix 
est.'" 

Ibid.  XCV. 

"  Item  apud  eundem  in  Eccle- 
siastico:  'Viri  justi  sint  tibi  con- 
vivae.' " 


Eccli.  VI.  16. 

"  Amicus  fidelis,  medicamen- 
tum  vitae  et  immortalitatis  :  et 
qui  metuunt  Dominum,  inveni- 
ent  ilium." 

Eccli.  IX.  18. 

*'  Longe  abesto  ab  homine  po- 
testatem  habente  occidendi,  et 
non  suspicaberis  timorem." 

Eccli.  XXV.  12. 

"  Beatus,  qui  invenit  amicum 
verum,  et  qui  enarrat  justitiam 
auri  audienti." 


Ibid. 

"  Et  iterum  :  '  Amicus  fidelis, 
medicamentum  vitae  et  immor- 
talitatis.' " 

Ibid. 

"  Item  illic:  *  Longe  abesto  ab 
homine  potestatem  habente  occi- 
dendi, et  non  suspicaberis  timo- 
rem.' " 

Ibid. 

"  Item  illic  :  '  Beatus  qui  in- 
venit amicum  verum,  et  qui  e- 
narrat  justitiam  auri  audienti — '  " 


138 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


Eccli.  XXVIII.  28. 

"Sepi  aures  tuas  spinis,  et  noli 
audire  linguam  nequam — ." 


Eccli.  IV.  34. 

"  Noli  citatus  esse  in  lingua 
tua:  et  inutilis,  et  remissus  in 
operibus  tuis." 

Eccli.  V.  8,  9. 

"  Non  tardes  convert!  ad  Do- 
minum,  et  ne  diflferas  de  die  in 
diem  ;  subito  enim  veniet  ira 
illius,  et  in  tempore  vindictae 
disperdet  te." 

Eccli.  VII.  39. 

"  Non  te  pigeat  visitare  infirm- 
um  :  ex  his  enim  in  dilectione 
firmaberis." 

Eccli.  XXVIII.  15. 

"  Susurro  et  bilinguis  maledic- 
tus  :  multos  enim  turbabit  pacem 
habentes." 

Eccli.  XXXIV.  23. 

"  Dona  iniquorum  non  probat 
Altissimus,  etc." 

Sap.  VI.  6—7. 

"  Horrende  et  cito  apparebit 
vobis:  quoniam  judicium  duris- 
simum  his,  qui  praesunt.  fiet. 
Exiguo  enim  conceditur  miseri- 
cordia  ;  potentes  autem  potenter 
tormenta  patientur." 

Eccli.  IV.  10 — II. 

"  Esto  pupillis  misericors  ut 
pater  ;  et  pro  viro  matri  illorum, 
et  eris  velut  filius  Altissimi,  si 
obedieris." 


Ibid. 

"  Item  illic  :  '  Sepi  aures  tuas 
spinis,  et  noli  audire  linguam 
nequam.'  " 

Ibid.  XCVI. 

"  Apud  Salomonem  in  Eccle- 
siastico  :  '  Noli  citatus  esse  in 
lingua  tua,  et  inutilis  et  remissus 
in  operibus  tuis.' " 

Ibid.  XCVII. 

"Apud  Salomonem  in  Eccle- 
siastico  :  '  Ne  tardes  converti  ad 
Deum,  et  ne  differas  de  die  in 
diem.  Subito  enim  venit  ira 
illius.'  " 

Ibid.  CIX. 

"Apud  Salomonem  in  Ecclesi- 
astico:  'Ne  pigriteris  visitare  in- 
firmum.  Ex  his  enim  in  dilec- 
tione firmaberis.'  " 

Ibid.  ex. 

"In  Ecclesiastico  apud  Salo- 
monem :  *  Susurro  et  bilinguis 
maledictus.  Multos  enim  tur- 
babit pacem  habentes.'  " 

Ibid.  CXI. 

"  Apud  eumdem  :  *  Dona  ini- 
quorum non  probat  Altissimus.'  " 

Ibid.  CXII. 

"Apud Salomonem:  'Judicium 
durissimum  in  his  qui  praesunt 
fiet.  Exiguo  enim  conceditur 
misericordia ;  potentes  autem 
potenter  tormenta  patientur.'  " 


Ibid.  CXIII. 

"Apud  Salomonem:  '  Esto  pu- 
pillis misericors  ut  pater  ;  et  pro 
viro  matri  illorum  ;  et  eris  velut 
filius  Altissimi  si  obedieris.'  " 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   CHURCH.  139 

Eccli.  II.  I.  De  Laude  Martyrii  XIV. 

"  Fili,  accedens  ad  servitutem  "  pili,  inquit   (Dominus),   ac- 

Dei,  sta  in  justitia,  et  timore,  et  cedens  ad  servitutem  Dei,  sta  in 

praepara  animam  tuam  ad  tenta-  justitia   et    timore,    et    praepara 

tionem."  animam  tuam  ad  tentationem." 

Eccli.  II.  4-  Ibid.  XVI. 

"  Omne,  quod  tibi  applicitum  «  Scriptum  est  et  legimus  :  *  In 

fuerit,  accipe :  et  in  dolore  sus-      dolore   sustine,  et  in  humilitate 

tine,  et  in  humilitate  tua  patien-      tua    habe    patientiam,    quoniam 

tiam  habe — ."  per   ignem    probatur    aurum   et 

argentum.' " 
Sap.  III.  4.  Ibid. 

(Oft  quoted.)  "  —  sicut  per  Prophetam  suum 

dixit :  '  Et  si  coram  hominibus, 
etc' "     (Oft  quoted.) 

These  numerous  quotations  evince  that  the  Church,  for  the 
first  three  centuries,  received  as  Divine  Scripture  all  the  books 
which,  later  in  the  Council  of  Trent,  she  solemnly  canonized. 
These  quotations  were  a  product  of  the  life  of  the  Church. 
The  Fathers  incorporated  into  their  works  these  numerous 
quotations,  not  by  means  of  Concordances  of  Holy  Writ,  or 
other  easy  method  of  reference ;  but  because  their  Christian 
education  had  been  mainly  derived  from  the  Holy  Books. 
They  spoke  from  the  fund  that  they  had  assimilated  from  the 
spiritual  food  of  the  Church  ;  and,  hence,  in  these  quotations^ 
they  are  exponents  not  of  their  own  opinions,  but  of  the  un- 
animous belief  of  a  Church  daily  baptized  in  the  blood  of  her 
martyrs. 

Against  this  harmonious  array  of  evidence  from  tradition, 
our  adversaries  bring  certain  objections,  based  upon  the  same 
source  of  information.  Their  Achilles  to  break  the  chain  of 
tradition  is  Meliton,  Bishop  of  Sardis.*  The  celebrated 
passage,  a  fragment  from  his  'E/CX07CLI/,  is  as  follows:  "  Mel- 
iton  sends  greeting  to  his  brother  Onesimus.  As  you  have 
frequently  desired,  in  your  zeal  for  the  Scriptures,  that  I 
should  make  selections  for  you  both  from  the  Law  and  the 
Prophets,  respecting  our  Saviour  and  our  whole  faith  ;  and  you 
were  moreover  desirous  of  having  an  exact  statement  of  the 
Old  Testament ;  how  many  in  number,  and  in  what  order  the 

*St.  Meliton  was  bishop  of  Sardis  in  Lydia  in  the  second  half  of  the  second 
century,  under  Marcus  Aurelius.  He  presented  to  this  prince  in  171  an 
Apology  for  the  Christians,  remarkable  for  candor  and  truth.  Of  his  num- 
erous writings  but  small  fragment  have  came  down  to  us. 


140  THE  CANON   OF  THE  CHURCH. 

books  were  written,  I  have  endeavored  to  perform  this ;  for  I 
know  your  zeal  in  the  faith,  and  your  great  desire  to  acquire 
knowledge,  and  that  especially  by  the  love  of  God  you  prefer 
these  matters  to  all  others,  thus  striving  to  gain  eternal  life. 
When,  therefore,  I  went  to  the  East,  and  came  as  far  as  the 
place  where  these  things  were  proclaimed  and  done,  I  ac- 
curately ascertained  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  send 
them  to  thee  here  below.  The  names  are  as  follows  :  Genesis, 
Exodus,  Leviticus,  Numbers  and  Deuteronomy;  Jesus  Nave, 
(Joshua),  Judges,  Ruth,  four  books  of  Kings,  two  of  Paralipo- 
mena,  Psalms  of  David,  Proverbs  of  Solomon,  which  is  also 
called  Wisdom,  Ecclesiastes,  Canticle  of  Canticles,  Job,  the 
Prophets  Isaias,  Jeremias,  and  of  the  twelve  prophets  one  book, 
Daniel,  Ezechiel,  and  Esdras.  From  these  I  have  made  six 
books  of  Selections." 

This  list  omits  Esther  and  all  the  deuterocanonical  books. 
The  omission  of  Esther  has  been  variously  explained.  Some 
have  attributed  it  to  a  lapse  of  memory ;  others  to  an  error  of 
the  copyist.  It  is  far  more  probable  that  such  omission  is 
due  to  the  uncertainty  and  discussions  that  then  existed 
among  the  Rabbis  concerning  this  book.  Meliton  depends 
on  the  Jews  entirely  for  his  canon.  He  finds  it  necessarj''  to 
go  to  their  country  to  ascertain  the  true  canon  of  the  Old 
Testament.  His  exclusion,  however,  of  the  deuterocanonical 
books  is  not  equivalent  to  their  condemnation.  In  his  Clavis 
in  S.  Scripturam,  he  employs  Wisdom  and  a  deuterocanonical 
fragment  of  Esther. 

Sap.  VIII.  I.  Ibid. 

"  Attingit  ergo  a  fine  usque  ad  "  —  et  in  Salomone  :  '  Sapien- 

finem  fortiter,  etc.*  "  tia  Domini  attingit  a  fine  usque 

ad  finem  fortiter.'  " 

Esther  X.  12.  Ibid. 

" — et  recordatus  est  Dominus  " — et  alibi :  *  Recordatus  est 

populi  sui,  etc."  Dominus  populi  sui.'  " 

There  seems  to  have  been  in  vogue  at  that  time  a  distinction 
of  the  Sacred  Writings  of  the  Old  Testament,  founded  more 
on  their  origin  than  on  any  internal  difference.  The  books 
which  the  Church  had  received  from  the  Jews,  and  which 
were  recognized  by  all  were  termed  ofioXoyov/jLcvoi.  The 
others  were  those  that  the  Church  had  received  from  the 
Septuagint,  and  which  the  Jews  rejected ;  these  were  the 
'afji(f>L^a\\6fi€voi.  Now  there  is  no  voice  in  tradition,  with 
the  sole  exception  of  St.  Jerome,  that  ever  rejected  these 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   CHURCH.  141 

books.  As  witnesses  of  tradition,  they  make  no  discrimina- 
tion between  these  two  classes ;  but  as  critics,  in  which  capacity 
they  are  of  least  worth,  they  sometimes  omit  these  from  the 
official  list  of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  It  may  be  that  some  one 
among  them  doubted  of  the  divinity  of  the  writings.  We  are 
not  seeking  of  them  what  they  individually  held,  but  what  the 
Church  of  their  day  taught  and  believed. 

In  the  growth  and  development  of  doctrine  this  has  always 
been  verified,  that  certain  truths  were  less  clearly  conspicuous  in 
the  deposit  of  faith  in  the  beginning,  which  afterwards  grew  to 
their  full  life  in  the  body  of  the  Church's  doctrines.  Meliton 
may  have  doubted  ;  he  does  not  deny.  Other  truths,  which  have 
been  defined  on  the  warrant  of  tradition,  have  encountered 
stronger  opposition.  St.  Thomas  strenously  denied  the  Immac- 
ulate Conception,  and  yet  that  truth  triumphed,  and  finally 
entered  among  the  defined  dogmas.  In  tradition,  we  must  lose 
sight  of  the  individual,  and  of  his  private  opinions,  and  seek  only 
the  faith  of  the  Church  reflected  in  his  writings.  Again,  Meli- 
ton's  position  may  be  explained  as  only  an  indication  of  the 
greater  extrinsic  authority  of  the  protocanonical  books.  The 
question  in  his  day  had  not  been  defined  by  the  Church. 
The  protocanonical  books  could  claim  a  sort  of  official  promul- 
gation, inasmuch  as  they  were  transmitted  by  the  old  cus- 
todians of  Jahve's  law.  The  deuterocanonical  books  had  only 
the  usage  of  the  Christian  people  in  their  favor.  Now,  in 
such  case,  a  man,  even  though  revering  the  second  class  as 
God's  word,  could  rightly  restrict  the  word  canonical  to  the 
first  class.  Ail  Catholics  receive  and  honor  all  of  Mary's  pre- 
rogatives, but  no  one  can  place  among  the  dogmas  of  faith 
her  Assumption,  and  it  is  only  in  our  own  times  that  we  may 
incorporate  among  the  dogmas  the  Immaculate  Conception. 
But  even  were  we  to  concede  the  worst,  that  Meliton  rejected 
the  deuterocanonical  books,  our  thesis  is  not  weakened.  His 
would  be  the  critical  error  of  one  man,  availing  naught  against 
the  voice  of  the  Church  of  truth,  reverberating  through  the 
practical  usage  of  the  "  pars  docens  "  and  "  pars  discens  "  of 
the  Church. 

The  value  of  this  proof  from  tradition  is  not  impaired  by 
the  Fathers'  occasional  references  to  the  Apocryphal  books. 

Tertullian,  De  Cultu  Fceminarum  Lib.  I.  3,  approves  the 
Book  of  Henoch.  "  I  know,"  he  says  "  that  the  work  of 
Henoch  which  gives  such  order  to  the  Angels  is  by  some  not 
received,  because  it  is  not  admitted  in  the  Jewish  deposit.  I 
believe  that  they  judge  that  the  book  written  before  the  deluge 


142  THE  CANON   OF  THE  CHURCH. 

could  not  endure  after  such  universal  abolition  of  all  things. 
If  that  is  their  plea,  let  them  remember  that  the  great  grand- 
son of  Henoch  survived  the  cataclysm  of  Noah  ;  and  he,  for- 
sooth, had  heard  and  memorized  in  the  domestic  tradition  his 
ancient  progenitor's  favor  with  God,  and  all  his  noted  deeds; 
since  Henoch  commanded  nought  else  to  his  son,  except  that  he 
hand  down  these  things  to  posterity.  Therefore,  without  doubt, 
Noah  could  succeed  in  the  line  of  the  tradition ;  and,  moreover, 
he  (Noah)  would  not  have  kept  silent  the  disposition  of  God, 
his  preserver,  and  the  glory  of  his  house.  Moreover,  by  the 
Holy  Spirit  he  (Noah)  could  have  restored  the  Scripture  that 
perished  in  the  deluge,  in  the  manner  that  Ezra  restored  the 
Jewish  literature,  that  was  destroyed  in  the  Babylonian  cap- 
tivity. Wherefore,  since  Henoch  in  that  same  Scripture 
announces  concerning  the  Lord,  in  our  judgment,  nothing  is 
to  be  rejected.  And  we  read  (H.  Tim.  HI.  i6) :  'All  Scripture 
having  power  to  edify  is  divinely  inspired.'  It  may  rightly  be 
thought  that  it  is  rejected  by  the  Jews  in  the  same  manner  as 
the  other  things  which  treat  of  Christ.  Nor  is  it  surprising 
that  they  reject  the  Scriptures  which  treat  of  him  whom  they 
rejected  when  he  spoke  in  person  to  them.  We  add  that 
Henoch  has  a  testimony  in  the  Epistle  of  Jude  the  Apostle, 
(Jude  I.  14)." 

We  shall  see  later  on  that  Tertullian  errs  in  saying  that  St. 
Jude  quotes  from  Henoch.  The  sentence  of  Jude  was  taken 
from  a  tradition,  which  afterwards  formed  the  basis  of  the 
Apocryphal  book  of  Henoch.  The  Epistle  of  Barnabas  (IV. 
3;  XVI.  6.)  quotes  as  divine  Scripture  the  Book  of  Henoch  ; 
Clement  of  Alexandria  quotes  the  IV.  Book  of  Ezra  as  "  Ezra 
the  prophet."     III.  Strom.  16. 

St.    Athanasius,    Apolog.     Ad 

III.  Ezra  IV.  41.  Imp.  11. 

"  Et  desiit  loquendo,     Et  cm-  "  Hanc  cum  Zerobabel  sapiens 

nes  populi  clamaverunt,  et  dixe-  ille  vir  ceteris  anteferret,  alios 
runt :  Magna  est  Veritas,  et  prae-  superavit,  universusque  populus 
valet."  in  hanc  vocem  prorupit :  'Magna 

est  Veritas  et  praevalet.'  " 

Ibid.  IV.  37,  41,  47.  Idem  Sermo  Major  de  Fide,  35. 

"Et  omnes  populi  clamaverunt,  "  Quemadmodum  et  Ezra  pro- 

et  dixerunt :  Magna  est  Veritas,  et     phetico  spiritu  dicit  ex  persona 

praevalet."  Zerobabelis,  idque  de  Filio  Dei  : 

'  Vivit  Veritas,  et  vincit,  et  robor- 
atur,  manetque  in  saecula  saecu- 
lorum.'  " 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY.  143 

Origen  quotes  from  the  same  book : 

III.  Ezra  IV.  Orig.  Comment,  in  Josue,  VI. 

Ex  praefatione. 
"  Quia  Ezrae  tempore  cum  vi- 
num  et  inimicum,  regem  ac  de- 
nique  mulieres  vincit  Veritas,  re- 
aedificatur  templum  Dei." 

Orig.  In  Lib.  Josue,  Hom.  IX. 
III.  Ezra  IV.  59—60.  ^q. 

"  —  et  dixit  :  Abs  te  est  vie-  "  _  jta  ut  et  nos  dicamus,  sicut 

toria,  et  abs  te  est  sapientia  et      in  Ezra  scriptum  est :    '  Quia  a 
claritas.    Et  ego  servus  tuus  sum.      te,  Domine,  est  victoria,   et  ego 
Benedictus   es,  qui  dedisti  mihi      servus  tuus  :  benedictus  es,  Deus 
sapientiam,    et    tibi    confitebor,      veritatis.' " 
Domine  Deuspatrum  nostrorum." 

The  chain  of  tradition  is  not  broken  by  these  few  isolated 
references  to  some  of  the  Apocrypha.  In  these  few  cases,  the 
Fathers  are  exponents  of  their  individual  opinions,  and  are  to 
be  valued  only  as  mere  individuals.  They  do  not  quote  the 
Apocrypha  as  witnesses  of  the  belief-  of  the  Church.  The 
absolute  line  between  the  Canonical  and  Apocryphal  books  had 
not  been  promulgated  by  any  definite  authority,  and,  using 
their  liberty  as  individuals,  some  few  erroneously  extended 
inspiration  to  certain  books,  which  never  were  factors  in  the 
life  of  the  Church.  This  critical  error  then  of  the  Fathers  in 
these  rare  cases,  prevails  not  against  the  solemn  universal  wit- 
ness that  the  writers  of  these  early  ages  bear  to  the  appro- 
bation of  the  deuterocanonical  books,  in  the  practical  usage  of 
the  Christian  people. 

Relying  upon  the  certain  data  that  we  have  adduced,  we 
assert  that  if  tradition  be  taken  as  the  criterion  of  inspiration ; 
and  if  the  traditions  are  most  valued  that  go  back  closest  to 
the  Apostolic  age,  then  the  deuterocanonical  books  of  Holy 
Writ  rest  on  a  solid  foundation. 

Chapter  IX. 

The  Canon  of  the  Fathers  of  the  Fourth  Century, 
AND  First  Years  of  Fifth  Century. 

In  this  period,  the  unanimity  which  prevailed  for  the  first 
three  centuries  is  somewhat  broken,  especially  by  Jerome. 
The  doubts  which  arose  in  this  age  concerning  the  deutero- 
canonical books  prevailed  more  especially  in  the  East.  We 
find,   however,  that   not   one   of   the  Fathers  of   this  epoch, 


144         THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 

excepting  Jerome,  rejected  the  deuterocanonical  books.  Their 
opposition  to  them  never  passed  beyond  a  mere  doubt  con- 
cerning them.  We  find,  also,  in  this  period,  many  in  the  East 
and  in  the  West,  who  defend  a  Canon  identical  with  the 
Canon  of  Trent.  Lastly,  we  find  that  "the  very  men  who 
give  a  list  of  the  Jewish  books,  evince  an  inclination  to  the 
Christian  and  enlarged  Canon."  Thus,  we  see,  that  the  prac- 
tical tradition  of  the  Church  was  so  powerful,  that  it  overcame 
in  the  life  of  the  Church  the  doubts  of  individual  men  and 
isolated  churches. 

As  we  come  down  from  the  first  ages  of  the  Church,  the 
patristic  data  multiply,  and,  hence,  we  could  not  set  forth  here 
ever)'  particular  writer's  views  and  use  of  Holy  Scripture. 
Neither  is  such  now  necessary.  No  one  will  deny  that  in  this 
period,  Jerome  is  the  only  positive  opponent  of  the  deutero- 
canonical books.  All  likewise  recognize,  that  the  most  and  the 
greatest  of  the  Fathers  of  this  epoch  received  these  books  as 
divine  Scripture.  Many  adduce  here  the  authority  of  the 
Council  of  Nice,  325.  They  believe  that  in  that  council  there 
was  formulated  a  catalogue  of  books,  which  included  the 
deuterocanonical  Scripture.  The  proofs  for  the  assertion  of 
this  are  so  feeble,  that  we  pretermit  it  here  as  worthless  to 
establish  our  theory.* 

*Comely  defends  the  genuinity  of  the  canon  of  Scripture  of  the  Council 
of  Nice.     Among  his  proofs  are  the  following  : 

1.  St.  Jerome  in  his  preface  to  Judith  declares  that  the  Nicene  Synod  is 
said  to  have  included  the  book  of  Judith,  among  the  canonical  Scriptures. 
The  proving  force  of  this  testimony  is  not  very  great,  for  any  approba- 
tion of  the  book  in  the  deliberations  of  the  Council,  would  justify  Jerome's 
statement.  We  believe  that  the  Nicene  fathers  recognized  the  deuterocanon- 
ical books  as  divine  Scripture,  but  we  hold  that  it  is  not  sufficiently  substan- 
tiated by  historical  data,  that  they  drew  up  an  official  list  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures.  Had  they  done  so,  it  would  have  had  a  greater  influence  on  the 
trend  of  thought  of  the  Greek  fathers.  St.  Athanasius  would  not  have 
declared  that  it  was  a  bold  and  difficult  thing  to  fix  the  list  of  the  Holy  Books, 
had  there  been  promulgated  a  catalogue  of  the  same  by  a  council  of  which 
he  was  an  important  factor,  and  whose  decisions  he  venerated. 

2.  Comely  quotes  some  obscure  words  from  Cassiodorus,  reproduced 
from  Hefele  Conciliengesch.  II.  p.  486  ;  but  they  form  no  forcible  proof. 

3.  Comely  also  adduces  the  36th  canon  of  the  Council  of  Hippo,  A.  D.  393: 
"  Ut  praeter  Scripturas  Catholicas,  nihil  in  Ecclesia  legatur.  Capituli  XXIV. 
Nicaeni  Concilii.  Item  ut  praeter  Scripturas  Catholicas  nihil  in  ecclesia 
legatur  sub  nomine  divinarum  Scripturarum.  Sunt  autem  Canonicae 
Scripturae,  etc."  The  books  of  both  canons  are  there  mentioned.  This  Canon 
exists  but  in  one  sole  codex  in  the  Vallicellian  library,  in  Rome.  We  are  not 
disposed  to  detract  from  what  force  it  may  have,  but  we  do  not  feel  warranted 
to  refer  the  Council  of  Nice  among  the  proofs  of  the  Canon  in  the  fourth 
century.    Hefele  accords  no  certain  authority  to  the  aforesaid  Canon. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY.         145 

The  Council  of  Hippo  A.  D.  393  ;  the  Council  of  Carthage 
A.  D.  397;  and  the  second  Council  of  Carthage  in  419  A.  D. 
officially  promulgated  canons  of  Scripture  which  included  all 
the  deuterocanonical  books. 

Council  of  Hippo,  Can.  36: 

'*  The  Synod  defines  that  besides  the  canonical  Scrip- 
tures nothing  be  read  in  the  Church  under  the  name  of  di- 
vine Scripture.  The  Canonical  Scriptures  are  :  Genesis,  Ex- 
odus, Leviticus,  Numbers,  Deuteronomy,  Josue,  Judges, 
Ruth,  four  books  of  Kings  (Regnorum),  Paralipomena  two 
books.  Job,  The  Davidic  Psalter,  the  five  books  of  Solomon, 
the  twelve  (minor)  Prophets,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Daniel,  Eze- 
chiel,  Tobias,  Judith,  Esther,  Ezra  two  books,  Maccabees  two 
books."  The  first  Council  of  Carthage,  397  A.  D.,  confirms  the 
same  canon. 

The  second  Council  of  Carthage,  419  A.  D.,  has  the  fol- 
lowing :  "  It  is  decreed  that  nothing  but  the  canonical  Scrip- 
tures may  be  read  under  the  name  of  divine  Scripture.  The 
canonical  Scriptures  are  the  following:  Of  the  Old  Testament, 
Genesis, ...  Job,  the  VaaXter,  five  books  of  Solomon,  the  Prophets, 
Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Daniel,  (Ezechiel  is  wanting),  the  Twelve 
(minor)  Prophets,  Tobias,  Judith,  Esther,  two  books  of  Ezra, 
two  books  of  Maccabees ....  This  decree  shall  be  made  known 
to  our  brother  and  fellow  priest  Boniface,  the  Bishop  of  Rome, 
or  even  to  the  other  bishops  for  its  confirmation  ;  for  we  have 
received  from  the  Fathers,  that  thus  {the  Scriptures)  should  be 
read  in  the  Church^ 

Some  have  found  it  strange  that  the  three  African  Coun- 
cils were  held  at  such  short  intervals.  The  reason  of  the 
repetitions  of  the  Canon  seems  to  be  in  the  fact,  that  Catholic 
thought  had  been  disturbed  in  those  days  by  Jerome,  who  in 
his  Prologus  Galeaticus  to  the  Books  of  Kings,  rejected  out  of 
the  Canon  the  deuterocanonical  books,  A.  D.  390.  Repeatedly 
in  his  subsequent  labors,  he  inveighs  against  the  deuterocanon- 
ical books  and  fragments,  and  it  was  to  retain  the  Catholics 
faithful  to  their  old  traditions,  that  these  three  councils  repeat 
their  Canons  in  such  quick  succession. 

No  doubt  can  reasonably  exist,  regarding  St.  Augustine's 
attitude  towards  the  deuterocanonical  Scriptures.  He  was  an 
important  factor  in  the  three  councils  just  mentioned  :  and  re- 
peatedly in  his  works  he  declares  himself  clearly  for  the  deu- 
terocanonical books.  It  would  be  a  long  and  needless  task 
to  set  forth  Augustine's  use  of  deuterocanonical  Scripture. 
It  will  not  be  contradicted  by  any  patristic  scholar,  that  Angus- 


146         THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 

tine  held  in  equal  veneration,  the  protocanonical  and  deutero- 
canonical  books.  He  gives  his  views  of  Scripture  and  a  complete 
canon  in  the  Enchiridion  of  Christian  Doctrine,  Book  II.  VIII. 
"  But  let  us  now  go  back  to  consider  the  third  step  here 
mentioned,  for  it  is  about  it  that  I  have  set  myself  to  speak 
and  reason  as  the  Lord  shall  grant  me  wisdom.  The  most 
skillful  interpreter  of  the  sacred  writings,  then,  will  be  he  who 
in  the  first  place  has  read  them  all  and  retained  them  in  his 
knowledge,  if  not  yet  with  full  understanding,  still  with  such 
knowledge  as  reading  gives — those  of  them,  at  least,  that  are 
called  canonical.  For  he  will  read  the  others  with  greater 
safety  when  built  up  in  the  belief  of  the  truth,  so  that  they 
will  not  take  first  possession  of  a  weak  mind,  nor,  cheating 
it  with  dangerous  falsehoods  and  delusions,  fill  it  with  preju- 
dices adverse  to  a  sound  understanding.  Now,  in  regard  to 
the  canonical  Scriptures,  he  must  follow  the  judgment  of  the 
greater  number  of  Catholic  Churches;  and  among  these,  of 
course,  a  high  place  must  be  given  to  such  as  have  been 
thought  worthy  to  be  the  seat  of  an  Apostle  and  to  receive 
epistles.  Accordingly,  among  the  canonical  Scriptures  he  will 
judge  according  to  the  following  standard  :  to  prefer  those  that 
are  received  by  all  the  Catholic  Churches  to  those  which  some 
do  not  receive.  Among  those,  again,  which  are  not  received 
by  all,  he  will  prefer  such  as  have  the  sanction  of  the  greater 
number  and  those  of  greater  authority,  to  such  as  are  held  by 
the  smaller  number  and  those  of  less  authority.  If,  however, 
he  shall  find  that  some  books  are  held  by  the  greater  number 
of  churches,  and  others  by  the  churches  of  greater  authority 
(though  this  is  not  a  very  likely  thing  to  happen),  I  think,  that 
in  such  a  case,  the  authority  on  the  two  sides  is  to  be  looked 
upon  as  equal.  Now  the  whole  Canon  of  Scripture  on  which 
we  say  this  judgment  is  to  be  exercised,  is  contained  in  the 
following  books : — Five  books  of  Moses,  that  is  :  Genesis,  Ex- 
odus, Levicticus,  Numbers,  Deuteronomy ;  one  book  of  Joshua 
the  son  of  Nun  ;  one  of  Judges ;  one  short  book  called  Ruth, 
which  seems  rather  to  belong  to  the  beginning  of  Kings ;  next, 
four  books  of  Kings  and  two  of  Chronicles — these  last  not 
following  one  another,  but  running  parallel,  so  to  speak,  and 
going  over  the  same  ground.  The  books  now  mentioned  are 
history,  which  contains  a  connected  narrative  of  the  times,  and 
follows  the  order  of  the  events.  There  are  other  books  which 
seem  to  follow  no  regular  order,  and  are  connected  neither 
with  the  order  of  the  preceding  books  nor  with  one  another, 
such  as  Job,  and  Tobias,  and  Esther,  and  Judith,  and  the  two 


THE    CANON    OF   THE   IV.    CENTURY  147 

books  of  Maccabees  and  the  two  of  Ezra,  which  last  look  more 
like  a  sequel  to  the  continuous  regular  history  which  termin- 
ates with  the  books  of  Kings  and  Chronicles.  Next  are  the 
Prophets,  in  which  there  is  one  book  of  the  Psalms  of  David ; 
and  three  books  of  Solomon,  viz.:  Proverbs,  Song  of  Songs, 
and  Ecclesiastes.  For  two  books,  one  called  Wisdom  and  the 
other  Ecclesiasticus,  are  ascribed  to  Solomon  from  a  certain 
resemblance  of  style,  but  the  most  likely  opinion  is  that  they 
were  written  by  Jesus,  the  son  of  Sirach.  Still  they  are  to  be 
reckoned  among  the  prophetical  books,  since  they  have 
attained  recognition  as  being  authoritative.  The  remainder 
are  the  books  which  are  strictly  called  the  Prophets :  twelve 
separate  books  of  the  prophets  which  are  connected  with  one 
another,  and  having  never  been  disjoined,  are  reckoned  as  one 
book ;  the  names  of  these  prophets  are  as  follows : — Hosea, 
Joel,  Amos,  Obadiah,  Jonah,  Micah,  Nahum,  Habakkuk, 
Zephaniah,  Haggai,  Zechariah,  Malachi ;  then  there  are  the 
four  greater  Prophets,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Daniel,  Ezechiel.  The 
authority  of  the  Old  Testament  is  contained  within  the  limits 
of  these  forty-four  books.  That  of  the  New  Testament,  again, 
is  contained  within  the  following : — Four  books  of  the  Gospel, 
according  to  Matthew,  according  to  Mark,  according  to  Luke, 
according  to  John  ;  fourteen  epistles  of  the  Apostle  Paul — 
one  to  the  Romans,  two  to  the  Corinthians,  one  to  the  Gala- 
tians,  to  the  Ephesians,  to  the  Philippians,  two  to  the  Thessa- 
lonians,  one  to  the  Colossians,  two  to  Timothy,  one  to  Titus, 
to  Philemon,  to  the  Hebrews ;  two  of  Peter,  three  of  John, 
one  of  Jude,  and  one  of  James ;  one  book  of  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles,  and  one  of  the  Revelation  of  John." 

St.  Augustine's  practical  use  of  the  deuterocanonical  books 
may  be  judged  from  his  De  Civitate  Dei  and  Contra  Manichaeos 
taken  as  specimens.  In  the  former  work,  he  has  fifteen  quota- 
tions from  Wisdom,  fourteen  from  Ecclesiasticus,  two  from 
Baruch,  Judith,  and  Tobias  respectively,  and  one  from  the  Bene- 
dictus  of  Daniel.  In  his  work  against  the  Manicheans  he  has 
twenty-three  quotations  from  Wisdom,  six  from  Ecclesiasticus, 
two  from  Tobias,  one  from  Baruch  and  one  from  the  Macca- 
bees. In  his  work  Contra  Faustum  XXXIII.  9,  he  promul- 
gates the  Catholic  criterion  of  the  canonical  Scriptures :  "  I 
admonish  briefly  you,  who  hold  the  execrable  error  (of  the 
Manicheans),  if  ye  wish  to  follow  the  authority  of  that  Scrip- 
ture which  is  to  be  preferred  to  all  others,  that  ye  follow  that 
Scripture  which  from  the  time  of  Christ,  through  the  dispensa- 
tions of  the  Apostles,  and  of  the  Bishops,  who  succeeded  them 


148  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 

in  their  sees  by  certain  succession,  has  come  down  even  to  our 
day,  preserved  throughout  the  whole  earth,  approved  and  ex- 
plained." Chemnitz,  objected  against  Augustine's  authority 
for  the  deuterocanonical  Scripture,  citing  a  passage  from  his 
Contra  Gaudentium,  XXXI.  38  :  "  And  indeed  the  Scripture 
which  is  called  the  Maccabees  the  Jews  have  not,  as  they  have 
the  Law,  the  Prophets,  and  the  Psalms,  to  which  the  Lord 
bears  testimony  as  to  his  witnesses  saying  :  '  That  all  things 
must  needs  be  fulfilled  which  are  written  in  the  Law  of  Moses, 
and  in  the  Prophets,  and  in  the  Psalms  concerning  me '  (Luke 
XXIV.  44) ;  but  it  (Maccabees)  is  received  by  the  Church  not 
unprofitably,  if  it  be  soberly  read  or  heard.''  This  is  a  direct 
testimony  that  the  Church  to  whom  Augustine  directed  all  who 
would  receive  the  genuine  Scripture  had  received  and  sanc- 
tioned a  book,  not  contained  in  the  Jewish  Canon,  and  that 
such  book  was  not  without  profit  to  readers  and  hearers. 
Later  on  in  the  same  chapter  he  explains  what  he  means  by 
the  restrictive  clause  :  "  if  it  be  soberly  read  or  heard."  "  For 
we  should  not,"  he  says,  "  assenting  approve  all  things  that  we 
read  in  the  Scriptures  that  men  did,  even  though  they  be 
praised  by  the  testimony  of  God ;  but  we  should  consider  and 
discern,  using  the  judgment  not  of  our  own  authority,  but  of 
the  divine  and  holy  Scriptures,  which  does  not  permit  us  to 
approve  or  imitate  all  the  deeds  of  those  to  whom  it  bears  a 
good  and  excellent  testimony."  Augustine's  words  restrict 
not  the  authority  of  Maccabees  beneath  divine  Scripture,  but 
regulate  its  use.  The  same  words  might  have  been  applied 
by  him  to  the  Gospel  of  Matthew. 

There  are  sometimes  alleged  against  us  the  words  of  Augus- 
tine which  occur  Lib.  Retract.  X.  3  :  "  Thus  also  I  appear  not 
to  have  rightly  called  the  words  prophetic  in  which  it  is  written  : 
'Quid  superbit  terra  et  cinis?'  Eccli.  X.  9,  since  they  are 
not  written  in  the  book  of  one  whom  we  certainly  know  to 
have  been  a  prophet."  We  believe  that  it  is  not  the  intention 
of  Augustine  here  to  throw  doubt  on  Ecclesiasticus,  but  to  be 
accurate  in  drawing  a  distinction  between  Prophets  and  Hagio- 
graphers.     Such  subtlety  leaves  intact  a  book's  divinity. 

In  the  first  book  of  his  De  Predestinatione  Sanctorum  XIV. 
against  the  Pelagians,  who  rejected  the  book  of  Wisdom, 
Augustine  argues  thus  :  "  These  things  being  so,  there  should 
not  be  rejected  a  sentence  from  the  book  of  Wisdom,  which 
has  merited  to  be  read  by  the  order  of  lectors  in  the  Church  of 
Christ  for  so  many  years  (tam  longa  annositate),  and  which  has 
merited  to  be  listened  to  with  the  veneration  of  divine  author- 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY.  149 

ity  by  all  Christians,  from  bishops  to  the  extreme  lay  faithful 
penitents  and  catechumens."  Iterum  ibidem  :  "  But  those 
who  wish  to  be  taught  by  the  works  of  the  Fathers  (Tracta- 
torum)  must  needs  prefer  the  book  of  Wisdom  to  all  the 
Fathers  ;  for  the  celebrated  Fathers  nearest  in  time  to  the 
Apostles  preferred  it  to  their  own  opinions  ;  and  they,  using  it 
as  an  authority,  believed  that  they  were  making  use  of  nothing 
short  of  a  divine  testimony. 

"  It  is  evident,  that  with  Augustine,  the  condition  of  all  the 
deuterocanonical  books  was  the  same,  hence  by  applying  this 
testimony  to  the  entire  collection  we  have  not  alone  the  view 
of  Augustine,  but  a  succinct  statement  of  the  belief  and  usage 
of  the  Church  from  the  Apostles  to  his  own  day." 

A  document  which  sets  forth  the  official  attitude  towards 
the  deuterocanonical  Scripture  in  this  age  is  the  Decree  of 
Pope  Gelasius,  A.  D.  492 — A.  D.  496.* 

*'  Nunc  vero  de  Scripturis  divinis  agendum  est  quid 
universalis  recipiat  Ecclesia,  vel  quid  vitare  debeat.  Incipit 
ordo  Veteris  Testamenti,  Genesis  liber  I.  Exodi  liber  I. 
Levitici  liber  I.  Numeri  liber  I.  Deuteronomii  liber  I.  Jesu 
Nave  liber  I.  Judicum  liber  I.  Ruth  liber  I.  Regum 
libri  IV.  Paralipomenon  libri  II.  Psalmorum  CL.  liber  I. 
Salomonis  libri  III.  Proverbia  liber  I.  Ecclesiastes  liber  I. 
Cantici  Canticorum  liber  I.  Item  Sapientiae  liber  I. 
Ecclesiastici  liber  I.  Item  ordo  Prophetarum:  Esaiae  liber 
I.  Jeremiae  liber  I.  cum  Chinoth,  id  est,  Lamentationibus 
suis,  Ezechielis  liber  I.  Danielis  liber  I.  Osea  liber  I.  Amos 
liber  I.  Michaeae  liber  I.  Joel  liber  I.  Abdiae  liber  I.  Jonae  liber 
I.  Nahum  liber  I.  Abbacuc  liber  I.  Aggaei  liber  I.  Zachariae 
liber  I.  Malachi  liber  I.  Item  ordo  historiarum:  Job  liber  I. 
ab  aliis  omissus.  TobicB  liber  I.  Hesdrae  libri  II.  Hesther  liber  I. 
Judith  liber  I.  Machabaeorum  libri  II." 

In  the  year  405,  St.  Exuperius,  Bishop  of  Toulouse  (t4i7) 
wrote  to  Pope  Innocent  I.  asking  among  other  things  "  what 
books  should  be  received  in  the  Canon  of  Holy  Scripture." 
The  Pontiff  responds :  "  The  subjoined  brief  will  show  what 
books  should  be  received  into  the  Canon  of  Holy  Scripture. 
These  are  therefore  (the  books)  concerning  which  thou  hast 

*This  decree  is  not  found  the  same  in  the  different  codices.  It  is  by  some 
ascribed  to  Damasus  (A.  D.  366— A.  D.  384) ;  by  others  to  Gelasius  (A.  D. 
493— A.  D.  496) ;  and  by  others  to  Hormisdas  (A.  D.  514— A.  D.  523).  Cor- 
nely  believes  that  it  was  originally  a  decree  of  Damasus,  which  was  after- 
wards enlarged  by  Gelasius.  All  agree  that  it  was  an  authentic  promulgation 
from  the  Roman  See  in  that  period.    Hefele  Conciliengesch.  II.  620. 


160         THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 

wished  the  admonition  of  a  longed  for  voice.  The  five  books 
of  Moses. ..  .The  book  of  Jesus,  son  of  Nave,  one  book  of 
Judges,  the  four  books  of  Kings  and  Ruth,  sixteen  books  of 
Prophets,  five  books  of  Solomon,  the  Psalter ;  also  of  historical 
books,  one  book  of  Job,  one  of  Tobias,  one  of  Esther,  one  of 
Judith,  two  of  Maccabees,  two  of  Ezra  and  two  of  Paralipo- 
menon."  In  all  these  canons  Baruch  is  considered  an  integral 
part  of  Jeremiah.  The  canons  of  Gelasius  and  Innocent  are 
not  ex  cathedra  definitions,  but  plain  stditQvnQnts  of  the  belief  and 
usages  of  the  Church  from  her  central  authority. 

The  testimony  of  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries  to  the 
divinity  of  the  deuterocanonrcal  Scriptures  is  evinced  in  the 
four  great  codices  of  that  period  :  The  Vatican  and  Sinaitic 
of  the  fourth  century,  and  the  Alexandrian  and  Codex  of  St. 
Ephrem  of  the  fifth  century.  An  accurate  description  of  these 
codices  will  be  given  in  the  course  of  our  treatise.  Suffice  it 
to  say  here  that  they  all  make  no  discrimination  between  the 
protocanonical  and  deuterocanonical  books. 

The  Ethiopian  Version  of  Scripture,  made  in  the  fourth 
century,  and  the  Armenian  version,  made  in  the  beginning  of 
the  fifth  century,  contain  all  the  books  canonized  by  the 
Council  of  Trent.  At  what  time  the  deuterocanonical  books 
were  placed  in  the  Syriac  translation  known  as  the  Peshito 
is  not  known,  but  they  were  there  in  the  time  of  St.  Ephrem 
(t379)>  ^s  we  shall  see  in  the  course  of  the  present  work ; 
hence,  we  may  add  the  testimony  of  the  Syriac  Peshito  to  the 
data  for  the  deuterocanonical  books. 

Sacred  archaeology  also  affords  proofs  for  the  divinity  of 
the  deuterocanonical  books.  In  the  Catacombs,  we  find  fre- 
quent representations  from  the  deuterocanonical  books,  proving 
that  those  books  were  a  part  of  the  deposit  of  faith  of  the 
Church  of  the  Martyrs.  The  recent  researches  in  subterra- 
nean Rome  has  clearly  demonstrated  this  proof,  as  can  be 
seen  in  the  works  of  Vincenzi  (Sessio  IV.  Cone.  Trid.)  ;  Malou 
(Lecture  de  la  Bible  II.  144);  Garrucci  (Storia  dell'  Arte 
Christiana),  and  others.  The  constant  and  universal  tradition 
and  usage  of  the  first  three  centuries  are  corroborated  in  the 
fourth  and  fifth  century  by  the  express  declarations  and 
praxis  of  Fathers,  by  solemn  decrees  of  Councils  and  Popes, 
and  by  the  preserved  evidences  of  the  practical  life  of  the 
Church. 

The  adversaries  of  the  deuterocanonical  books  bring  against 
us  the  authority  of   the  Fathers  who  have  edited  canons  in 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY.         151 

which  the  deuterocanonical  books  find  no  place.  Preeminent 
for  age  and  authority  among  these  is  St.  Athanasius,  the 
decus  orthodoxiae.* 

We  reproduce  here  the  entire  quotation  from  which  the 
opposition  of  Athanasius  is  inferred ;  "  Since  many  have 
indeed  tried  to  place  in  order  those  books  which  are  called 
Apocrypha,  and  mix  them  with  the  divinely  inspired  Scripture 
which  we  have  received  upon  certain  testimony  as  the  Fathers 
handed  down  to  us,  who  from  the  beginning  were  eye-witnesses 
and  ministers  of  the  word,  it  has  seemed  good  to  me  also,  the 
brethren  exhorting,  to  compute  in  the  Canon,  as  I  have 
learned,  from  the  beginning,  and  in  order,  the  books  that  have 
been  handed  down  and  are  believed  to  be  divine,  that  everyone 
that  has  been  seduced  may  convict  the  seducers,  and  he  who 
has  persevered  incorrupt  may  joyously  remember  these.  The 
books  of  the  Old  Testament  are  in  number  twenty-two  ;  for  so 
many,  as  I  have  heard,  are  the  elements  (of  speech)  with  the 
Hebrews.  In  this  order,  and  by  these  names,  they  are  severally 
enumerated :  The  first  is  Genesis,  then  Exodus,  Leviticus, 
Numbers,  Deuteronomy,  Joshua  son  of  Nun,  Judges  and  Ruth 
follow ;  then  the  four  books  of  Kings,  of  which  the  first  and 
second  are  considered  as  one,  and,  in  like  manner,  the  third  and 
fourth.  Following  these  the  two  books  of  Paralipomenon  are 
also  considered  as  one,  as  also  the  first  and  second  of  Ezra. 
Then  come  the  book  of  Psalms,  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  the 
Canticle  of  Canticles  and  Job ;  then  the  Prophets  of  whom 
twelve  are  considered  as  one  book.  Then  Isaiah,  Jeremiah  and 
with  him  Bartich,  the  Lamentations,  and  the  Epistle ;  then 
follow  Ezechiel  and  Daniel,  thus  far  the  books  of  the  Old 
Testament." 

After  enumerating  the  complete  Canon  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, he  continues :  "  These  are  the  fountains  of  salvation, 
so  that  who  thirsts  may  be  filled  by  their  discourses ;  in 
these  alone,  the  Christian  doctrine  is  taught.  Let  no  one 
add  to  them  or  take  anything  from  them.  But  for  greater 
accuracy,  I  deem  it  necessary  to  add  this  also,  that  there  are, 
forsooth,  other  books  besides  these,  which,  indeed,  are  not  placed  tn 

*St.  Athanasius  was  descended  of  an  illustrious  family  of  Alexandria. 
He  was  ordained  deacon  by  St.  Alexander,  whom  in  326  he  succeeded  in  the 
see  of  Alexandria.  He  was  the  Charles  Martel  against  the  Arians  in  the 
Council  of  Nice,  and  combated  this  dreadful  heresy  throughout  his  life. 
His  long  episcopate  of  more  than  forty  years  was  a  perpetually  troubled  one. 
Many  times  he  was  forced  to  fly  to  the  exile  of  the  desert  to  escape  his 
insidious  foes.  He  is  the  great  patristic  authority  on  the  Trinity  and  the 
Incarnation. 


152  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 

the  Canon,  but  which  the  Fathers  decreed  should  be  read  to  those 
who  have  lately  co^ne  into  the  fold,  and  seek  to  be  catechized,  and 
who  study  to  learn  the  Christian  doctrine.  (These  are):  The 
Wisdom  of  Solomon  and  the  Wisdom  of  Sirach  (Ecclesiasticus), 
Esther,  Judith,  Tobias,  the  so-called  Doctrine  of  the  Apostles, 
and  Pastor.  Therefore,  while  the  former  are  in  the  Canon,  and 
these  latter  are  read,  there  is  no  mention  of  the  Apocrypha, 
which  are  the  figment  of  heretics  who  arbitrarily  write  books, 
to  which  they  assign  dates,  that  by  the  specious  semblance  of 
antiquity  they  may  find  occasion  to  deceive  the  simple."  Ep. 
Fest.  29. 

To  judge  rightly  St.  Athanasius'  attitude  towards  Holy 
Scripture,  we  must  recall  what  has  been  said  respecting 
Meliton.  We  must  readily  admit  that  in  these  ages  a  distinc- 
tion was  made  between  the  two  classes  of  books,  but  it  did  not 
deny  divine  inspiration  to  the  deuterocanonical  works.  A  greater 
dignity  was  given  by  some  Fathers  to  the  books  that  had  come 
down  to  the  Church  from  the  Jews ;  but  these  same  Fathers 
testify  to  the  veneration  in  which  the  deuterocanonical  works 
were  held  by  the  Church,  and  to  the  part  they  played  in  the 
life  of  the  faithful.  It  must  also  be  borne  in  mind  that 
Athanasius  flourished  in  Alexandria  the  fertile  source  of 
Apocrypha,  and  in  his  zeal  to  repel  the  inventions  of  heretics 
he  was  most  conservative  in  treating  the  Canon.  His  location 
of  Esther  among  the  deuterocanonical  books  is  unique,  and 
was  probably  caused  by  the  sanguinary  character  of  the  book, 
which  also  led  some  Jews  to  doubt  of  its  divine  inspiration. 

His  omission  of  Maccabees  seems  to  be  an  oversight  since 
he  adverts  to  their  history  in  his  writings.  We  do  not  seek  to 
establish  that  the  status  of  the  two  classes  of  books  was  the 
same  with  Athanasius  ;  but  we  judge  it  evident  from  his  writ- 
ings that  he  venerated  these  same  books  as  divine,  although 
not  equal  in  extrinsic  authority  to  the  books  officially  handed 
down  from  the  Jews.  The  testimony  of  Athanasius  that  the 
Fathers  of  the  Church  had  decreed  that  these  books  should  be 
read  in  the  Church  manifests  clearly  the  Church's  attitude 
towards  these  books ;  and  the  following  passages,  taken  from 
the  writings   of   Athanasius,  show  how  deeply  he   also  had 

drunk  from  these  founts. 

Athanas.  Oratio  Contra  Gen- 
Sap.  XIV.  12.  tes,  9. 
"  Initium    enim    fornicationis  " — quod  et  Dei  sapientia  his 

est  exquisitio  idolorum:  et  adin-  verbis  declarat  :  '  Initium  forni- 

ventio    illorum    corruptio    vitae  cationis     est     exquisitio     idolo- 

est — ."  rum.'  " 


THE   CANON    OF   THE   IV.    CENTURY. 


153 


Sap.  XIV.  12—21. 
"Initium  fornicationis,  etc." 


Sap.  XIV.  21. 

"  Et  haec  fuit  vitae  humanae 
deceptio  :  quoniam  aut  affectui, 
aut  regibus  deservientes  homines, 
incommunicabile  nomen  lapidi- 
bus  et  lignis  imposuerunt." 

Sap.  XIII.  5. 

"  —  a  magnitudine  enim  spe- 
ciei,  et  creaturae  cognoscibiliter 
poterit  Creator  horum  videri — ." 

Sap.  VI.  19. 

"  Cura  ergo  disciplinae  dilec- 
tio  est :  et  dilectio  custodia  le- 
gum  illius  est :  custoditio  autem 
legum  consummatio  incorrup- 
tionis  est — ." 

Sap.  II.  23,  24. 

"  Quoniam  Deus  creavit  homi- 
nem  inexterminabilem,  et  ad 
imaginem  similitudinis  suae  fecit 
ilium.  Invidia  autem  diaboli 
mors  introivit  in  orbem  ter- 
rarum — ." 

Sap.  I.  II. 

"  Custodite  ergo  vos  a  mur- 
muratione,  quae  nihil  prodest,  et 
a  detractione  parcite  linguae, 
quoniam  sermo  obscurus  in  va- 
cuum non  ibit :  os  autem,  quod 
mentitur,  occidit  animam." 

Tob.  XII.  7. 

"  Sacramentum  regis  abscon- 
dere,  etc." 


Ibid. 

**  Haec. . .  .jam  olim  Scriptura 
his  verbis  complexa  est:  '  Initium 
fornicationis,  etc'  "  Pergit  usque 
ad  Vers.  21. 

Ibid.  17. 

"  — sed  cum  incommunicabile, 
ut  loquitur  Scriptura,  Dei  nomen 
et  honorem  iis  qui  non  dii  sed 
mortales  homines  fuere  ascribere 
studuerunt — ." 

Ibid.  44. 

"  Ex  magnitudine  et  pulchri- 
tudine  rerum  creatarum  conveni- 
enter  Creator  conspicitur." 

S.  Athanas.  De   Incarnatione 
Dei,  4. 

" — sicuti  Sapientia  ait:  '  Ob- 
servatio  legum  confirmatio  est 
incorruptionis.  " 


Ibid. 

" — ut  et  Sapientia  his  verbis 
testatur:  *  Deus  creavit  hominem 
ut  incorruptus  esset,  et  imaginem 
propriae  aeternitatis  :  invidia  au- 
tem diaboli  mors  introivit  in 
mundum.' " 

Ath.  Apolog.  et  contra  Arianos, 
3- 

"  — nee  timeant  illud  quod  in 

Sacris  Litteris  scriptum  est : 

*  Os  quod  mentitur  occidit  ani- 
mam.' " 


Ibid.  II. 

"  — cum  oporteat,  ut  scriptum 
est :  '  Sacramentum  regis  abscon- 
dere.'  " 


154 


THE  CANON    OF  THE   IV.  CENTURY. 


Eccli.  XXX.  4. 

"  Mortuus  est  pater  ejus,  et 
quasi  non  est  mortuus:  similem 
enim  reliquit  sibi  post  se." 

Baruch  III.  12. 

"  Dereliquisti  fontem  sapien- 
tiae— ." 

Ibid. 


This  quotation  is  not  made  use  of  by  Athanasius,  but  is 
found  in  an  apologetic  treatise  directed  to  him  by  a  synod 
held  at  Alexandria,  of  the  bishops  of  Egypt,  Thebais,  Libyia 
and  Pentapolis.  It  is  thus  the  testimony  of  the  East  to  the 
divinity  of  the  deuterocanonical  works. 

In  the  letter  of  St.  Alexander  of  Alexandriae  to  his  co- 
laborer,  we  find  the  following : 

Ibid.  66. 

"  Mortuus  est  enim,  ait  quodam 
in  loco  S.  Scriptura,  pater  ejus 
et  quasi  non  est  mortuus." 

St.  Ath.  De  Decretis  Synod. 
Nicenae,  12. 

"  Verbum  item  Israelem  objur- 
gans  ait :  '  Dereliquisti  fontem 
sapientiae.'  " 

Ibid.  15. 

"Hujus  porro  sapientiae  fon- 
tem esse  Deum  nos  docet  Baruch, 
ubi  videlicet  redarguitur  Israel 
fontem  sapientiae  dereliquisse." 

S.  Ath.  De  Sententia  Dionysii, 

15- 
"  —  congruenter  rursum  Chris- 
tus  vapor  dictus  est :  'Est  enim,* 
inquit,  '  vapor  virtutis  Dei.*  " 

Idem    Epist.    ad    Episcopos 

Aegypti  et  Libyae,  3. 
"  Non  est  speciosa  laus  in  ore 
peccatoris." 

Idem  Apolog.  ad  Const.  Imp. 

5- 
"  Nam  OS  quod  mentitur  occi- 
dit  animam." 


Sap.  VII.  25. 

"  Vapor  est  enim  virtutis  Dei, 


etc. 


Eccli.  XV.  9. 

"  Non  est  speciosa  laus  in  ore 
peccatoris.*' 


Sap.  I. 


(Already  quoted.) 

Tob.  IV.  19. 

"  Consilium  semper  a  sapiente 
perquire." 

Sap.  III.  5. 

"In  paucis  vexati,  in  multis 
bene  disponentur,  quoniam  Deus 
tentavit  eos,  et  invenit  illos  dig- 
nos  se." 


Ibid.  17. 

"  Scriptum  est :  *  Ab  omni  sa- 
piente consilium  accipe.' " 

Idem  Apolog.  DeFuga  Sua,  19. 

"  Nam  sicut  aurum  in  fornace 
probatos,  ut  ait  Sapientia,  'in- 
venit illos  Dominus  dignos  se.'  " 


THE   CANON    OF   THE   IV.   CENTURY. 


156 


Sap.  II.  21. 

"  Haec  cogitaverunt,  et  errave- 
runt :  excaecavit  enim  illos  ma- 
litia  eorum." 

Eccl.  XIX.  26. 

"  Ex  visu  cognoscitur  vir,  et 
ab  occurso  faciei  cognoscitur  sen- 

satus." 

Baruch  IV.  20,  22. 

"  Exui  me  stola  pacis,  indui 
autem  me  sacco  obsecrationis,  et 
clamabo  ad  Altissimum  in  diebus 
meis.  Ego  enim  speravi  in  aeter- 
num,  salutem  vestram  et  venit 
mihi  gaudium  a  sancto,  etc." 

Dan.  XIII.  42. 

**  Exclamavit  autem  voce  mag- 
na Susanna,  et  dixit  :  Deus 
aeterne,  qui  absconditorum  es 
cognitor,  qui  nosti  omnia  ante- 
quam  fiant." 

Baruch  III.  12. 

"  Dereliquisti  fontem  sapien- 
tiae — ." 


Eccli.  XXIV.  12. 

"  Tunc  praecepit,  et  dixit  mihi 
Creator  omnium  :  et  qui  creavit 
me,  requievit  in  tabernaculo 
meo — ." 

Sap.  XIII.  5. 

"  —  a  magnitudine  enim  spe- 
ciei  et  creaturae,  cognoscibiliter 
poterit  Creator  horum  videri — ." 

Judith  XIII.  15. 

"  — non  enim  quasi  homo,  sic 
Deus  comminabitur,  neque  sicut 
filius  hominis  ad  iracundiam  in- 
flammabitur." 


Ibid.  71. 

"  In  his  itaque  eorum  mentem 
excaecavit  malitia." 

Idem    Contra    Arianos    Orat. 

1.4. 
*'  —  sapientia  ait :    '  Ex  verbis 
suis  cognoscitur  vir.'  " 

Ibid.  12. 

"Susanna  quoque  aiebat:  'Deus 
sempiterne.'  Baruch  item  scrip- 
sit  :  '  Clamabo  ad  Deum  sempi- 
ternum  in  diebus  meis.'  Et  paulo 
post :  '  Ego  enim  speravi  in  sem- 
piternum  salutem  vestram  et 
venit  mihi  gaudium  a  Sancto.'  " 

Ibid.  13. 

"Et  apud  Dan.:  'Exclamavit 
voce  magna  Susanna  et  dixit : 
Deus  aeterne,  qui  absconditorum 
es  cognitor,  qui  nosti  omnia  ante- 
quam  fiant.'  " 

Ibid.  19. 

" — item  apud  Baruch  scriptum 
est :  *  Dereliquistis  fontem  sapi- 
entiae.' " 

Idem    Contra    Arianos,  Orat. 

II.  4. 
"  — vel  si  ipse  de  seipso  ait : 
'  Dominus  creavit  me.*  " 


Ibid.  32. 

"  Siquidem  ex  magnitudine  et 
pulchritudine  rerum  creatarum, 
illarum  Creator  convenienter 
conspicitur," 

Ibid.  35. 

"  '  Deus  autem  non  ut  homo 
est,  quemadmodum  testatur  Scrip- 
tura:  " 


166 


THE   CANON    OF   THE   IV.  CENTURY. 


Baruch  III.  12. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Sap.  IX.  2. 

"  — et  sapientia  tua  constituisti 
hominem,  ut  dominaretur  crea- 
turae,  quae  a  te  facta  est — ." 

Baruch  III.  36. 

"  Hie  est  Deus  noster,  et  non 
aestimabitur  alius  adversus  eum." 

Sap.  VI.  26. 

"  Multitude  autem  sapientum 
sanitas  est  orbis  terrarum :  et 
rex  sapiens  stabilimentum  populi 
est." 

Eccli.  I.  lo. 

"  Et  effudit  illam  super  omnia 
opera  sua,  et  super  omnem  car- 
nem  secundum  datum  suum,  et 
praebuit  illam  diligentibus  se." 


Dan.  XIV.  4. 

"  Qui  respondens,  ait  ei:  Quia 
non  colo  idola  manufacta,  sed 
viventem  Deum,  qui  creavit  cae- 
lum, et  terram,  et  habet  potesta- 
tem  omnis  carnis." 

Dan.  XIII.  45. 

"  Cumque  duceretur  ad  mor- 
tem, suscitavit  Dominus  spiritum 
sanctum  pueri  junioris,  cujus 
nomen  Daniel  — ." 

Baruch  III.  i. 

"  Et  nunc,  Domine  omnipo- 
tens,  Deus  Israel,  anima  in  an- 
gustiis,  et  spiritus  anxius  clamat 
ad  te." 

Dan.  III.  86. 

"Benedicite  spiritus,  et  animae 
justorum.  Domino ;laudate  et  sup- 
erexaltate  eum  in  saecula." 


Ibid.  42. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  45. 

"  Et  in  libro  Sapientiae  legitur: 
*  Et  sapientia  tua  constituisti  ho- 
minem ut  dominaretur  creaturis 
quae  a  te  factae  sunt.'  " 

Ibid.  49. 

"  Et  Baruch:  'Hie  est  Deus 
noster,  non  aestimabitur  alius 
adversus  eum.'  " 

Ibid.  79. 

"  Vel  si  nulla  est  sapientia,  cur 
multitude  sapientum  in  Scriptura 
memoratur  ? " 

Ibid. 

"  —  ut  hisce  verbis  testatur 
filius  Sirach  :  '  Effudit  illam  in 
omnia  opera  sua  cum  omni  came, 
secundum  donationem  suam,  et 
praebuit  illam  diligentibus  se.' " 

Idem  Contra  Arianos,  Orat. 
III.  30. 

"  Item  Daniel  Astyagi  dixit : 
'  Ego  idola  manufacta  non  colo, 
sed  Deum  viventem  qui  coelum 
et  terram  creavit,  et  in  omnem 
carnem  dominatum  habet.'  " 

S.  Athanas.  Epist.  I.  ad  Sera- 
pionem,  5. 

"  Et  apud  Danielem  :  '  Susci- 
tavit Deus  Spiritum  pueri  junioris 
cujus  nomen  Daniel,  et  exclama- 
vit  voce  magna  :  Mundus  ego 
sum  a  sanguine  hujus.'  " 

Ibid.  7. 

"  Baruch  item  his  verbis  preca- 
tur  :  '  Anima  in  angustiis  et  spi- 
ritus anxius  clamat  ad  te,'  et  in 
Jfymno  trium  Puerorum.  '  Be- 
nedicte  spiritus  et  animae  justo- 
rum Domino.' " 


THE  CANON    OF  THE   IV.   CENTURY. 


157 


Baruch  III.  lo,  12. 

"  Quid  est  Israel,  quod  in  terra 
inimicorum  es  ?  Dereliquisti  fon- 
tem  sapientiae." 

Sap.  I.  5. 

"  Spiritus  enim  sanctus  discip- 
linae  effugiet  fictum,  et  auferet 
se  a  cogitationibus,  quae  sunt 
sine  intellectu," 

Sap.  XII.  I. 

"  O  quam  bonus  et  suavis  est, 
Domine,  spiritus  tuus  in  omni- 
bus ! " 

Dan.  III.  57. 

"  Benedicite  omnia  opera  Do- 
mini Domino,  etc." 

Sap.  I.  7. 

"  Quoniam  spiritus  Domini  re- 
plevit  orbem  terrarum,  etc." 

Dan.  XIV.  4. 

"  Qui  respondens,  ait  ei:  *  Quia 
non  colo  idola  manufacta,  sed 
viventem  Deum,  qui  creavit  coe- 
lum,  et  terram  et  habet  potesta- 
tem  omnis  carnis." 

Eccli.  I.  32. 

" —  exsecratio  autem  pecca- 
tori,  cultura  Dei." 

Dan.  XIII.  42. 

"  Exclamavit  autem  voce  mag- 
na Susanna,  et  dixit :  '  Deus 
aeterne,  qui  absconditorum  es 
cognitor,  qui  nosti  omnia  ante- 
quam  fiant.'  " 

Baruch  III.  36—38. 

"  Hie  est  Deus  noster,  et  non 
aestimabitur  alius  adversus  eum. 
Hie  adinvenit  omnem  viam  dis- 


Ibid.  19, 

"  Et  iterum  apud  Baruch  : 
'Quid  est  Israel,  quod  in  terra 
inimicorum  es  ?  dereliquisti  fon- 
tem  sapientiae.' " 

Ibid.  26. 

" '  Spiritus  sanctus,'  inquit, 
'disciplinae  fugiet  dolum,  et 
auferet  se  a  cogitationibus  quae 
sunt  sine  intellectu.'  " 

Ibid.  25. 

" — iterum  in  Sapientia  legi- 
tur  :  *  Tuus  enim  incorruptus 
spiritus  est  in  omnibus." 

Idem  Epist.  II.  ad  Serap.  6. 
"  Benedicite  omnia  opera  Do- 
mini Domino." 

Idem  Epist.  III.  ad  Serap.  4. 

'*  Ita  enim  scriptum  est :  '  Spi- 
ritus Domini  replevit  orbem  ter- 
rarum.' " 

Idem  Epist.  IV.  ad  Serap.  21. 

"  Ita  quoque  Daniel  libere  Da- 
rium  affatus  est :  '  Non  veneror 
idola  manufacta,  sed  viventem 
Deum  qui  creavit  coelum  et  ter- 
ram, et  habet  potestatem  omnis 
carnis.'  " 

S.  Ath.  Vita  S.  Antonii,  28. 
"  —  nam  *  exsecratio  peccatori 
est  pietas  erga  Deum." 

Ibid.  31. 

" — solusque  Deus  novit  omnia 
antequam  fiant." 


St.  Athan,  De  Incarnat.  et 
contra  Arianos  (In  fine). 

" — quemadmodum  et  Jeremias 
dicit :  '  Hie  est  Deus  noster,  et 
non  aestimabitur  alius  adversus 


158 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   IV.   CENTURY. 


ciplinae,  et  tradidit  illam  Jacob 
puero  suo,  et  Israel  dilecto  suo. 
Post  haec  in  terris  visus  est,  et 
cum  hominibus  conversatus  est." 


Sap.  II.  24. 

"  Invidia  autem  diaboli  mors 
introivit  in  orbem  terrarum — ." 


Dan.  III.  57—62  ;  88. 


Baruch  III.  12, 

(Already  quoted.) 

Baruch  III.  12 — 13. 

"  Dereliquisti  fontem  sapien- 
tiae ;  nam  si  in  via  Dei  ambulas- 
ses,  habitasses  utique  in  pace 
sempiterna." 

Sap.  V.  3. 

**  — dicentes  intra  se,  poeniten- 
tiam  agentes,  et  prae  angustia 
spiritus  gementes:  Hi  sunt,  quos 
habuimus  aliquando  in  derisum, 
et  in  similitudinem  improperii." 

Eccli.  XXXVIII.  9. 

"Fill,  in  tua  infirmitate  ne 
despicias  te  ipsum,  sed  ora  Do- 
minum,  et  ipse  curabit  te." 


eum.  Hie  adinvenit  omnem 
viam  scientiae,  et  tradidit  illam 
Jacob  puero  suo  et  Israel  dilecto 
suo.  Post  haec  in  terris  visus 
est  et  cum  hominibus  conversatus 
est.*  " 

St.  Athanas.  Contra  Apollina- 

rium,  Lib.  I.  7. 
*'  Invidia  autem  diaboli  mors 
intravit  in  mundum." 
Ibid.  15. 
Repetit  idem. 

St.  Ath.  De  Trinitate  et  S. 
Spiritu,  2. 

"Tres  quoque  sancti  martyres, 
Ananias  Azarias  et  Misael,  in 
fornace  ignis  positi  in  terra 
Chaldaeorum,  cum  admirabiliter 
Deus  calorem  ignis  ad  temper- 
atum  refrigerium  convertisset, 
universam  creaturam  adhortantes 
secum  laudare  Deum,  sic  incipi- 
unt  :  *  Benedicite,  etc'  "  Citat 
majorem  partem  Cantici  Trium 
Puerorum. 

Ibid.  19. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Ibid.  20. 

" — dicit :  *  Dereliquisti  fontem 

sapientiae;  viam  Domini  si  fuisses 

ingressus,  utique  habitares  in  pace 

in  aeternum  tempus." 

St.  Ath.Sermo  Major  De  Fide,28. 

"  Hie  est  quem  habuimus  ali- 
quando in  derisionem — -." 


St.  Ath.  Fragment  De  Amu- 
letis. 

"  —  coelesti  sapientiae  obse- 
quens  dicenti :  '  Fili,  in  tempore 
infirmitatis  tuae  ne  despicias,  sed 
ora  Dominum,  et  ipse  curabit 
te." 


THE   CANON    OF  THE   IV.    CENTURY. 


159 


Eccli.  XV.  9. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Dan.  III.  50. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Sap.  VII.  27. 

"  Et  cum  sit  una,  omnia  potest: 
et  in  se  permanens  omnia  innovat, 
et  per  nationes  in  animas  sanctas 
se  transfert,  amicos  Dei  et  pro- 
phetas  constituit." 

Sap.  II.  12. 

"Circumveniamus  ergo  justum, 
quoniam  inutilis  est  nobis,  etc." 

Eccli.  XXVII.  29. 
"  Et  qui  foveam  fodit,  incidet 
in  earn,  etc." 

Sap.  II.  12. 

(Already  quoted.) 
Dan.  XII. 


Eccli.  XV.  9. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Baruch  II.  35. 

"  Et  statuam  illis  testamentum 
alterum  sempiternura,  ut  sim  illis 
in  Deum,  et  ipsi  erunt  mihi  in 
populum,  etc." 

Eccli.  II.  I. 

"  Fili,  accedens  ad  servitutem 
Dei,  sta  in  justitia,  et  timore,  et 
praepara  animam  tuam  ad  tenta- 
tionem." 

Eccli.  XVIII.  6. 
"  Cum   consummaverit   homo, 
tunc  incipiet,  etc." 


Idem,  Epist.  VII.  4. 
(Already  quoted.) 

Idem,  Epist.  X.  3. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Ibid.  4. 

"  — prout  de  Sapientia  testatur 
Salomon  *  quae  cum  una  sit, 
omnia  potest,  et  in  se  manens 
omnia  renovat,  et  cum  ad  sanctas 
animas  accedet,  tunc  Dei  ama- 
tores  et  prophetas  efficit.'  " 

Idem,  Epist.  XI.  5. 
"  Circumveniamus  justum,  quia 
nobis  minime  placet." 

Ibidem. 

**  Qui  foveam  proximo  suo 
fodit  in  eamdem  incidet." 

Idem,  Epist.  XIX. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Idem,  Epist.  ad  Marcellinum,  9. 

"  Spiritu  edoctus  quisque  ser- 

monem    administrat    ita   ut 

aliquando  historias  praescribant 
ut  Daniel  Susannae — ." 

Ibid.  29. 

(Already  quoted.) 

S.     Ath.     Expositio     in     Ps. 
LXXVII.  10. 

"  Novam  Evangelii  traditionem 
dicit  atque  illud :  *  Ecce  dies 
venit,  et  disponam  cum  eis  tes- 
tamentum novum.'  " 

Idem,  in  Ps.  CXVII. 

" — juxta  illud:  'Accedis  ad 
serviendum  Domino,  praepara 
animam  tuam  ad  tentationem.'  " 

Idem,  Ps.  CXVIII.  60. 
Repetit  idem. 
Ibidem  96, 

" — iuxta  illud:  *Cum  con- 
summatur  homo,  tunc  incipit.'  " 


160 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 


St.Ath.  De  Titulis  Psalmorum, 
De  Ps.  LXXVII.  137. 

'*  Et  in  terra  visus  est,  et  cum 
hominibus  conversatus  est.  (Re- 
petit  idem  in  Ps.  XCIII.) 

St.  Athan.  Fragmenta  in  Math. 

"  Eodem  quoque  modo  senes 
duo  cum  Susannae  dixissent  : 
*  Ecce  in  concupiscentia  tui  su- 
mus  — .'  " 

Ibid. 

" —  juxta  Sapientiae  verbum  : 
'  Anima  calida  est  ut  ignis  accen- 
sus.'  " 

Ibid. 

"  Daniel  vero  lascivos  senes 
sycophantiae  causa  a  se  damna- 
tos  juxta  legem  Moysis  ultus  est." 

Ibid.  De  Falsis  Prophetis. 

"  Si  videris  sapientem  aliquem, 
ex  consilio  Sapientiae,  mane  vi- 
gila  ad  ilium,  stationes  portarum 
ejus  terat  pes  tuus,  ut  ab  eo  edis- 
cas  legis  umbras  et  gratiarum 
dona. " 

Ibid.  De  Lunaticis. 
"  — Sapientia  ita  loquente  :  'A 
luna,  signum  diei  festi.'  " 
Expositio  in  Ps.  LXXVIII. 
"  Carries     Sanctorum      tuorutn 
bestiis  terrae.      Quomodo    enim 
sancti  non  fuerunt  quorum  san- 
guis effusus  est  pro  legis  obser- 
vantia,  ex  quorum  erant  numero 
Maccabaei  ? " 
Athanasius   simply  considered 
these  books  as  pious  productions,  somewhat  like  to  our  Imita- 
tion of  Christ.     Quoting  a  text  from  Judith,  as  we  have  seen 
above,  Contra  Arianos  II.  38,  he  explicitly  adds  "  ut  testatur 
Scriptura'' 

His  insertion  of  Pastor  and  the  Doctrina  Apostolorum 
among  the  books  of  the  second  canon  is  a  critical  error  of  his 
own,  and  not  warranted  by  the  usage  of  the  Church.     Canon- 


Baruch  III.  38. 

"  Post  haec  in  terris  visus  est, 
et  cum  hominibus  conversatus 
est." 

Dan.  XIII.  20. 

"  Ecce,  ostia  pomarii  clausa 
sunt,  et  nemo  nos  videt,  et  nos 
in  concupiscentia  tui  sumus, 
etc." 

Eccli.  XXIII.  %2. 

"  Anima  calida  quasi  ignis  ar- 
dens  non  extinguetur,  donee  ali- 
quid  glutiat." 

Dan.  XIII. 


Eccli.  VI.  36. 

"  Et  si  videris  sensatum,  evi- 
gila  ad  eum,  et  gradus  ostiorum 
illius  exterat  pes  tuus." 


Eccli.  XLIII  7. 
"  A    luna    signum 


diei   festi. 


etc. 


Maccab.  Passim. 


No  man   can   say  that   S. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY.         161 

icity  and  divinity  were  not  in  the  mind  of  Athanasius  convert- 
ible terms.  There  had  been  no  official  promulgation  of  a 
canon,  and  hence,  he  applied  the  term  to  the  list  of  books 
which  of  old  had  received  the  sanction  of  the  Synagogue. 
We  feel  warranted,  then,  in  saying  that  as  a  witness  of  tradi- 
tion in  his  practical  use  of  Scripture  the  weight  of  Athanasius' 
authority  is  with  us,  while,  in  his  capacity  of  critic,  he  accords 
to  the  deuterocanonical  books  in  general  a  veneration  which 
the  Church  never  gave  to  any  but  divine  books. 

We  omit  the  Synopsis  Scripturae,  formerly  falsely  ascribed 
to  Athanasius,  since  it  covers  the  same  ground  as  the  testi- 
mony already  quoted. 

Another  Father  whose  authority  is  invoked  against  us  is 
St.  Cyrill  of  Jerusalem.* 

The  testimony  upon  which  his  authority  is  invoked  against 
us  is  found  in  his  fourth  Catechesis,  Chapters  33,  35,  and  36. 
The  following  excerpts  will  illustrate  his  position  : 

"  Studiously  also  learn  from  the  Church  what  are  the  books 
of  the  Old  Testament,  and  what,  of  the  New.  Read  to  me  noth- 
ing of  the  Apocrypha.  For  thou,  who  art  ignorant  of  those  books 
which  are  recognized  and  received  by  all,  why  dost  thou 
wretchedly  lose  thy  labor  about  those  which  are  doubtful  and 
controverted  ?  Read  the  divine  Scriptures,  the  twenty-two 
books  of  the  Old  Testament,  which  the  seventy-two  inter- 
preters translated.  *  *  *  Read  these  twenty-two  books,  and 
have  naught  to  do  with  the  Apocrypha.  These  alone  studi- 
ously meditate  and  handle,  which  we  also  read  in  the  Church 
with  certain  confidence.  Much  more  prudent  and  more  pious 
were  the  Apostles  and  the  ancient  bishops,  the  rectors  of  the 
Church,  who  handed  them  down.  Thou,  therefore,  being  a 
child  of  the  Church,  overstep  not  the  established  laws."  Con- 
tinuing, he  gives  the  same  canon  as  that  of  Athanasius,  except 
that  he  conjoins  Ruth  with  Judges,  and  includes  Esther,  thus 

*St.  Cyrill  of  Jerusalem  was  born  about  the  year  315  A.  D.  He  was 
ordained  deacon  by  St.  Macarius  of  Jerusalem,  and  priest  by  St.  Maximus. 
whom  he  succeeded  in  the  See  of  Jerusalem  in  the  year  350  A.  D.  His  epis- 
copate was  troubled  by  the  opposition  of  the  Arians,  then  powerful  in  the 
East.  He  was  often  exiled  by  the  intrigues  of  these,  and  was  marked  for 
death  by  Julian  the  Apostate,  but  the  death  of  Julian  prevented  the  execution 
of  his  project.  Cyrill  died  in  his  see  in  386.  In  one  of  his  letters  to  Con- 
stans  he  testifies  to  a  marvelous  luminous  apparition  of  a  cross  which 
extended  from  Mt.  Calvary  to  Mt.  Olivet,  which  was  witnessed  by  many  for 
several  hours.  His  chief  works  are  his  Catecheses  to  the  Catechumens  and 
Neophytes.  Although  some  of  Cyrill's  opinions  are  strange,  he  was  a  staunch 
defender  of  the  faith,  and  merits  to  be  considered  a  coryphaeus  in  patristic 
theology. 
K 


162         THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 

preserving  the  number  twenty-two.  And  he  adds  :  "  But  let 
all  the  other  (books)  be  held  outside  (the  canon)  in  a  second 
(inferior)  order.  And  whatever  are  not  read  in  the  churches, 
do  thou  not  read  these  even  privately." 

In  truthfully  weighing  this  testimony,  we  find  in  the  first 
sentence  the  adoption  of  our  criterion  of  inspiration:  ^^Studi- 
ously also  learn  from  the  Church  what  are  the  books  of  the  Old 
Testament,  and  what  of  the  New."  In  the  enunciation  of  this 
eternal  verity,  Cyrill  spoke  in  the  name  of  the  whole  Church. 
It  was  always  believed,  and  always  will  be  believed  by  those 
of  the  faith  of  Christ,  that  it  was  the  province  of  the  Church 
to  regulate  the  code  of  Scripture.  This  every  Father  believed 
and  taught.  Neither  does  Cyrill  characterize  as  apocryphal 
the  deuterocanonical  books.  He  considered  them  doubtful 
and  of  an  inferior  rank,  and  hence,  exhorts  the  catechumens  to 
make  use  of  those  concerning  which  there  was  no  doubt.  In 
forbidding  the  converts  to  read  privately  the  books  which  were 
not  read  in  the  Church,  he  tacitly  allows  such  private  reading 
of  the  deuterocanonical  books.  The  spirit  of  the  Church  at 
Jerusalem  was  extremely  conservative,  tinged  with  Judaism. 
Naturally  for  such,  the  books  which  the  synagogue  did  not 
recognize  would  be  regarded  with  some  disfavor.  Cyrill  was 
influenced  by  the  trend  of  religious  thought  reigning  at  Jeru- 
salem. He  sacrificed  nothing  by  his  strict  views  on  the  canon. 
The  protocanonical  books  are  the  most  useful ;  the  Church 
had  not  defined  the  Canon  ;  and  Cyrill  safeguarded  the  rights 
of  the  Church  by  bidding  everyone  go  to  her  for  the  Canon. 
The  protocanonical  and  deuterocanonical  books  were  not  made 
absolutely  equal  until  the  decree  of  the  Council  of  Trent.  The 
Fathers  considered  the  latter  as  useful,  edifying,  and  most  of 
the  Fathers  considered  them  of  divine  origin,  but  they,  in 
general,  accorded  them  a  less  dignity  and  veneration  than  that 
given  the  protocanonical  books.  The  slight  doubt  that  reigned 
in  some  churches  regarding  their  divine  origin  induced  Cyrill 
to  place  them  in  an  inferior  rank.  In  the  uncertainty  of  re- 
ligious thought  of  his  time,  he  judged  it  better  that  the  neo. 
phytes  should  devote  their  study  to  the  absolutely  certain 
sources  of  divine  truth.  Were  Cyrill  alive  to-day,  he  would 
learn  from  the  Church  to  receive  the  complete  Canon. 

In  his  practical  use  of  Scripture,  Cyrill  follows  the  usage  of 
the  Church,  and  often  quotes  the  deuterocanonical  books,  as 
the  following  examples  will  show : 


THE  CANON    OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 


163 


Dan.  III.  27,  29. 

" — quia  Justus  es  in  omnibus, 
quae  fecisti  nobis,  et  universa 
opera  tua  vera,  et  viae  tuae  rec- 
tae,  et  omnia  judicia  tua  vera. 
Peccavimus  enim,  et  inique  egi- 
mus,  etc." 

Eccli.  III.  22. 

"  Altiora  te  ne  quaesieris,  et 
fortiora  te  ne  scrutatus  fueris  : 
sed  quae  praecepit  tibi  Deus,  ilia 
cogita  semper,  et  in  pluribus 
operibus  ejus  ne  fueris  curio- 
sus." 

Sap.  XIII.  2. 

"  —  sed  aut  ignem,  aut  spiri- 
tum,  aut  citatum  aerem,  aut 
gyrum  stellarum,  aut  nimiam 
aquam,  aut  solem  et  lunam,  rec- 
tores  orbis  terrarum  deos  puta- 
verunt." 

Sap.  XIII.  5. 

"  — a  magnitudine  enim  spe- 
ciei  et  creaturae,  cognoscibiliter 
poterit  creator  horum  videri — ." 


Eccli.  XLIII.  2. 

"  Sol  in  aspectu  annuntians  in 
exitu,  vas  admirabile  opus  ex- 
celsi." 


Sap.  XIII.  5. 

"  —  a  magnitudine  enim  spe- 
cie et  creaturae,  cognoscibiliter 
poterit  Creator  horum  videri — ." 


Catech.  II.  XVI. 

"  —  illicque  pro  malorum  re- 
medio  dicebant :  *  Justus  es,  Do- 
mine,  in  omnibus  quae  fecisti 
nobis:  peccavimus  enim  et  inique 
egimus.'  " 


Catech.  VI.  4. 

'*  Prof undiora  te  ne  quaesieris, 
et  fortiora  te  ne  in  vestiges:  quae 
tibi  praecepta  sunt,  ea  mente 
agita." 


Ibid.  8. 

"  Deum   nonnulli  ignem   esse 
senserunt." 


Catech.  IX.  2. 

"  — juxta  Salomonem  qui  ait : 
'  nam  ex  magnitudine  et  pulchri- 
tudine  creaturarum,  proportione 
servata,  procreator  earum  con- 
spicitur.'  " 

Ibid.  6. 

**  —  nonne  admirari  oportet 
eum  qui  in  solis  fabricam  inspex- 
erit  ?  nam  modici  vasis  apparens 
vim  ingentem  complectitur ;  ab 
oriente  apparens  et  in  occiden- 
tem  usque  lumen  emittens." 

Ibid.  16. 

" — et  ex  his  quae  dicta  lec- 
taque  sunt,  quaeque  ipse  reperire 
aut  cogitare  poteris,  'ex  magni- 
tudine et  pulchritudine  creatur- 
arum, proportione  servata,  Auc- 
torera  earum  conspicias." 


164 


THE   CANON    OF   THE   IV.  CENTURY. 


Baruch  III.  36,  38. 

"  Hie  est  Deus  noster,  et  non 
aestimabitur  alius  adversus  eum. 
Hie  adinvenit  omnem  viam  dis- 
ciplinae,  et  tradidit  illam  Jaeob 
puero  suo,  et  Israel  dileeto  suo. 
Post  haee  in  terris  visus  est,  et 
cum  hominibus  conversatus  est." 

Eceli.  III.  22. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Sap.  II.  24. 

*'  Invidia  autem  diaboli  mors 
introivit  in  orbem  terrarum — ." 

Eeeli.  IV.  36. 

"  Non  sit  porreeta  manus  tua 
ad  aeeipiendum,  et  ad  dandum 
coUecta." 

Dsn.  XIV.  35. 

"  Et  apprehendit  eum  Angelus 
Domini  in  vertiee  ejus,  et  por- 
tavit  eum  capillo  capitis  sui." 

Sap.  VI.  17. 

"Quoniam  dignos  se  ipsa  cir- 
cuit quaerens,  et  in  viis  ostendit 
se  illis  hilariter,  et  in  omni  pro- 
videntia  oecurrit  illis." 

Dan.  XIII.  42 — 45. 

"  Exclamavit  autem  voce  mag- 
na Susanna,  et  dixit :  Deus 
aeterne,  qui  absconditorum  es 
cognitor,  qui  nosti  omnia,  ante- 
quam  fiant,  tu  scis,  quoniam  fal- 
sum  testimonium  tulerunt  contra 
me,  et  ecce,  morior,  cum  nihil 
horum  fecerim,  quae  isti  mali- 
tiose  composuerunt  adversum 
me.  Exaudivit  autem  Dominus 
vocem  ejus.  Cumque  duceretur 
ad  mortem,  suscitavit  Dominus 
spiritum  sanctum  pueri  junioris, 
cujus  nomen  Daniel  — ." 


Catech.  XI.  15. 

" — audi  Prophetam  dicentem: 
*Hic  est  Deus  noster,  non  repu- 
tabitur  alius  adversus  eum.  In- 
venit  omnem  viam  scientiae,  et 
dedit  earn  Jacob  puero  suo,  et 
Israel  dileeto  a  se.  Post  haee  in 
terra  visus  est,  et  cum  hominibus 
conversatus  est." 

Ibid.  19. 

"  Ne  extollas  teipsum,  ne  cadas. 
Quae  tibi  mandata  sunt  ea  sola 
meditare." 

Catech.  XII.  5. 

"  At  maximum  hoe  opifieiorum 
Dei  in  paradiso  choros  agens 
inde  diaboli  ejecit  invidia" 

Catech.  XIII.  8. 

"  Nee  enim  ad  aeeipiendum 
tantum  porreeta,  verum  etiam  ad 
operandum  prompta  tibi  sit  ma- 
nus." 

Catech.  XIV.  25. 

"  Si  enim  Habacue  ab  angelo 
translatus  est,  per  eomam  sui 
capitis  portatus,  etc." 

Catech.  XVI.  19. 

" —  tantum  illi  ostia  aperia- 

mus  ;  circumit  enim  quaerens  dig- 
it 
nos. 

Ibid.  31. 

**  Idem  (Spiritus  Sanetus) 
sapientem  effecit  Danielis  ani- 
mam  ut  seniorum  judex  esset 
adolescens.  Damnata  fuerat 
casta  Susanna  tamquam  impu- 
dica  ;  vindex  nullus  ;  quis  enim 
eam  a  principibus  eripuisset  ?  Ad 
mortem  ducebatur,  in  manibus 
lictorum  jam  erat....  scriptum 
est  enim  :  '  Suscitavit  Deus  Spiri- 
tum sanctum  in  puero  juven- 
culo. '  " 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY.  165 

Catech.   XXIII.  Mystagogica, 
Eccli.  XXXIV.  9.  V.  17. 

"Qui   non   est  tentatus,  quid  " — et  quomodo  alicubi  dic- 

scit  ?"  turn  est :  '  Vir  non  tentatus,  non 

est  probatus.' " 
We  must  admit  that  Cyrill's  use  of  deuterocanonical 
Scripture  is  more  restricted  than  that  of  other  writers,  but  it  is 
sufficient  to  show  how  the  general  belief  and  usage  of  the 
Church  overcame  the  critical  views  of  the  individual.  The 
force  of  such  general  acceptance  of  the  Church  may  easily  be 
judged  from  this  alone,  that  in  the  very  Catecheses  in  which  he 
recommends  to  the  Catechumens  the  use  of  only  the  proto- 
canonical  books,  he  himself  employs  the  deuterocanonical 
books  as  divine  Scripture. 

There  is  also  alleged  against  us  the  authority  of  Epiphanius.* 
The  passage  upon  which  his  opposition  to  the  deutero- 
canonical works  is  founded,  occurs  in  the  fourth  chapter  of  the 
treatise  on  Weights  and  Measures.  In  this  Chapter,  he  en- 
deavors to  make  the  number  of  canonical  books  of  the  Old 
Testament  accord  with  the  twenty-two  letters  of  the  Hebrew 
alphabet.  Of  course,  he  only  enumerates  the  books  of  the 
Jewish  Canon.  The  closing  words  of  the  chapter  are :  "  Re- 
garding the  two  books  that  are  written  in  verse,  that  is,  the 
Wisdom  of  Solomon,  which  is  called  Panaretus,  and  the  book 
of  Jesus  the  son  of  Sirach,  the  grandson  of  Jesus,  who  wrote  this 
book  of  Wisdom  in  Hebrew,  which  his  grandson  Jesus  translated 
into  Greek,  although  they  are  useful  and  profitable,  they  are 
by  no  means  placed  in  the  Canon  of  Scripture.     Hence,  they 

*St.  Epiphanius  was  born  in  Palestine,  about  the  year  310  A.  D.  His 
youth  was  spent  in  the  life  of  a  solitary  in  the  desert.  He  founded  at  the 
age  of  twenty  a  monastery  in  the  desert,  and  devoted  himself  to  the  study  of 
sacred  and  profane  writers.  The  result  of  his  continued  application  to  read- 
ing is  apparent  in  his  works.  In  366  he  was  made  Bishop  of  Salamina  the 
metropolis  of  Cyprus.  In  the  capacity  of  bishop,  he  was  a  sturdy  bulwark 
against  the  teeming  heresies  of  that  age.  He  bitterly  opposed  the  theories  of 
Origen,  and,  in  his  zeal  to  anathematize  him,  was  discourteous  to  John 
Chrysostom.  His  imprudent  zeal  often  led  him  to  encroach  on  the  jurisdic- 
tion of  other  bishops.  He  died  on  a  return  voyage  by  sea  from  Constanti- 
nople to  Cyprus  in  403.  The  works  of  Epiphanius  exhibit  a  vast  erudition, 
marred  by  a  lack  of  criticism,  and  by  the  insertion  of  many  fables.  He  was  a 
compiler  more  than  an  original  thinker.  His  style  is  harsh,  negligent, 
obscure,  and  often  without  logical  sequence.  He  lacked  the  power  and 
discerning  mind  to  master  and  order  the  vast  amount  that  he  had  read.  His 
chief  works  are  his  Panarium  or  Treatise  against  the  Heresies,  the  Anchor- 
age, the  Treatise  of  the  Weights  and  Measures  of  the  Jews,  and  a  treatise 
concerning  the  twelve  precious  stones  of  the  rational  of  the  High  Priest  of 
the  Jews. 


166         THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 

were  not  placed  in  the  Ark  of  the  testament."  The  obscurity 
and  lack  of  critical  acumen  of  the  writer  appear  in  this  short 
extract.  It  is  evident  that  he  supposes  that  the  divine  books 
of  the  Jews  were  placed  in  the  Ark  of  the  covenant,  whereas  only 
the  Pentateuch  was  therein  placed.  The  term  canonical  with 
Epiphanius,  signified  the  official  approbation  by  the  Synagogue. 
Being  a  native  of  Palestine,  his  mind  was  in  a  measure  tinged 
by  Judaizing  theories.  In  his  day,  the  deuterocanonical  books 
were  not  officially  canonized  by  any  universal  authority.  They 
had  the  sanction  of  usage  and  the  veneration  of  the  Church, 
but  this  did  not  make  them  equal  in  extrinsic  authority  to  the 
books  that  Jew  and  Christian  had  always  considered  divine. 
Although  Epiphanius  speaks  only  of  Wisdom  and  Ecclesias- 
ticus,  his  words  equally  apply  to  the  other  deuterocanonical 
books,  since  their  history  has  always  been  the  same.  The 
reason  that  Tobias,  Judith  and  Maccabees  receive  no  recogni- 
tion from  Cyrill  and  Epiphanius,  is  most  probably  that  they 
are  not  so  useful  to  impart  dogmatic  truths.  Comely  and 
others  think  that  Epiphanius,  in  giving  in  this  place  the  re- 
stricted Jewish  Canon,  tacitly  infers  the  existence  of  an 
enlarged  Christian  Canon.  We  fail  to  find  this  opinion  credi- 
ble. Everything  seems  to  demonstrate  that  the  canonization 
spoken  of  in  those  days  was  simply  the  official  sanction  of  the 
Synagogue.  This  was  the  one  and  only  Canon  that  these 
Fathers  recognized,  but  in  excluding  the  other  books  from  it, 
they  did  not  deny  them  divinity,  although  many  accorded 
them  an  inferior  dignity.  All  the  books  were  read  ;  all  were 
venerated  by  the  faithful ;  but  the  books  of  the  first  Canon  had 
the  external  sanction  of  the  Synagogue,  which  raised  them 
theoretically  above  the  others.  It  was  only  in  the  Council  of 
Trent,  that  the  official  declaration  of  the  Church  made  the  two 
classes  perfectly  equal.  Now,  such  official  declaration  being 
wanting,  it  is  not  strange  that  these  Fathers  theoretically  treat- 
ing the  question  should  not  place  these  books  in  the  Canon. 
Neither  is  it  strange  that  individuals  should  have  doubted 
concerning  the  divinity  of  these  books.  It  shows  the  need  of 
the  Magisterium  of  the  Church,  which  entered  at  the  appropri- 
ate time,  and  took  away  all  doubt  by  her  authoritative  voice. 
That  Epiphanius  at  least  considered  Wisdom  and  Ecclesias- 
ticus  as  divine  Scripture,  appears  from  the  following  passage 
from  Adversus  Haereses,  Haeres.  LXXVI.  5  :  "For  if  thou  wert 
begotten  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  taught  by  the  Apostles  and 
Prophets,  this  shouldst  thou  do:  Examine  all  the  sacred 
codices  from  Genesis  to  the  times  of  Esther,  which  are  twenty- 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 


167 


seven  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  are  enumerated  as 
twenty-two;  then  the  four  Holy  Gospels. ..  .the  Books  of 
Wisdom,  that  of  Solomon,  and  of  the  Son  of  Sirach,  and  in  fine 
all  the  books  of  Scripture^  Hence,  Epiphanius,  as  it  were, 
made  two  classes  of  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures;  the  books 
canonized  by  the  Jews,  and  those  adopted  and  used  by  the 
Church  as  Holy  Writ.  In  favor  of  the  former,  was  the  authority 
of  the  Synagogue  ;  while  all  used  and  venerated  the  latter,  as, 
individuals,  they  did  not  feel  warranted  in  according  them  a 
prerogative  that  the  Church  had  not  yet  given. 

Epiphanius'  use  of  the  deuterocanonical  books  will  appear 
from  the  following  passages : 

Adversus    Haereses,    Lib.    I. 
Eccli.  VII.  I.  Haeres.  XXIV.  6. 


"  Noli  facere  mala,  et  non  te 
apprehendent." 

Sap.  III.  14. 

■'  —  et  spado,  qui  non  opera- 
tus  est  per  manus  suas  iniquita- 
tem,  etc." 


Maccab.  I.  i. 


Dan.  XIII.  42. 

"  Exclamavit  autem  voce 
magna  Susanna,  et  dixit :  Deus 
aeterne,  qui  absconditorum  es 
cognitor,  qui  nosti  omnia  ante- 
quam  fiant — ." 

Eccli.  XIII.  20. 

"  Omnis  care  ad  similem  sibi 
conjungetur,  et  omnis  homo  si- 
mili  sui  sociabitur." 


"  —  quemadmodum  Scriptura 
testatur  :  *  Qui  quaerunt  mala, 
mala  eos  apprehendant.'  " 

Ibid.  Haeres.  XXVI.  15. 

"Ad  haec  alio  in  loco  Spiritus 
Sanctus . . .  hoc  rnodo  vaticina- 
tus  est :  *  Beata  sterilis  incoin- 
quinata,  quae  nescivit  torum  in 
delicto,  et  spado,  qui  non  opera- 
tus  est  manibus  suis  iniquita- 
tem.'  " 

Ibid.  Haeres.  XXX.  25. 

"  Quae  causa  est  cur  in  Mac- 
cabaeorum  libris  scriptum  sit: 
* —  e  Cittiensium  terra  genus 
quodam  esse  propagatum.'  " 

Ibid.  31. 

"  Novit  enim  omnia  Deus  ante- 
quam  fiant,  '  ut  est  Scriptum.'  " 


Ibid.  Haeres.  XXXII.  8. 

"Quoniam  avis  omnis  secun- 
dum genus  suum  congregatur,  et 
omnis  homo  simili  sui  sociabitur 
*  ait  Scriptura.'  " 


168 


THE  CANON   OF  THE  IV.   CENTURY. 


Eccli.  XLIII.  26. 

"  Qui  navigant  mare,  enarrent 
pericula  ejus;  et  audientes  auri- 
bus  nostris  admirabimur." 

Eccli.  XIV.  5. 

"  Qui  sibi  nequam  est,  cui  alii 
bonus  erit?" 


Sap.  VII.  2. 

"  Decern  mensium  tempore  co- 
agulatus  sum  in  sanguine,  etc." 


Baruch  III.  36—38. 

"  Hie  est  Deus  noster,  et  non 
aestimabitur  alius  adversus  eum. 
Hie  adinvenit  omnem  viam  dis- 
ciplinae  et  tradidit  illam  Jacob 
puero  suo  et  Israel  dilecto  suo. 
Post  haec  in  terris  visus  est,  et 
cum  hominibus  conversatus  est." 

Baruch  III.  36. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Eccli.  XX.  2. 

"  Concupiscentia  spadonis  de- 
virginabit  juvenculam — ." 

Eccli.  XXVII.  2. 

"  Sicut  in  medio  compaginis 
lapidum  palus  figitur  sic  et  inter 
medium  venditionis  et  emptionis 
angustiabitur  peccatum." 

Sap.  I.  13. 

"  Quoniam  Deus  mortem  non 
fecit,  nee  laetatur  in  perditione 
vivorum." 


Ibid.  Haeres.  XLII.  9. 

"  —  ut  haec  in  nobis  vera  sit 
Scripturae  sententia  :  '  Qui  navi- 
gant mare,  virtutes  Domini  nar- 
rant.'  " 

Ibid.  Haeres.  XLII.  Refut.  70. 

"  Quis  seipsum  in  praeceps  im- 
pellit,  impletque  quod  scriptum 
est :  '  Qui  sibi  nequam  est,  cui 
bonus  erit  ?'  " 

Ibid.  Lib.  II.   Haeres.   II.   29. 

"  In  quo  ad  Salomonis  dictum 
illud  allusisse  videntur  :  '  Decem 
mensium  spatio  concretus  in  san- 
guine." 

Ibid.  Haeres.  LVII.  2. 

"  —  ut  Scriptura  declarat  : 
'  Hie  est  Deus  tuus  ;  non  reputa- 
bitur  alius  ad  ipsum.  Invenit 
omnem  viam  seientiae  et  dedit 
illam  Jacob  puero  suo,  et  Israel 
dilecto  suo.  Post  haec  in  terra 
visus  est,  et  eum  hominibus  con- 
versatus est.'  " 

Ibid.  9. 

'*  Scriptum  est,  inquit :  '  Iste 
Deus  est  noster,  et  non  aestima- 
bitur alius.'  " 

Ibid.  Haeres.  LVIII.  4. 

"  — a  Sapiente  dicitur  :  '  Con- 
cupiscentia spadonis  devirginabit 
juvenculam." 

Ibid.  Haeres.  LIX.  7. 

"  Atque  'ut  palus,'  inquit, 
'inter  duos  lapides  eonteritur, 
sic  peccatum  in  medio  ejus  qui 
emit  et  vendit.'  " 

Ibid.  Haeres.  LXIV.  19. 

"  Deus  enim  mortem  non  fecit, 
nee  deleetatur  in  perditione  vi- 
ventium.  Invidia  vero  diaboli 
mors  introvit  in  mundum,'  ut  per 
Salomonem  Sapientia  testaiur." 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   IV.  CENTURY. 


169 


Sap.  I,  14. 

"  Creavit  enim,  ut  essent  om- 
nia :  et  sanabiles  fecit  nationes 
orbis  terrarum  :  et  non  est  in  illis 
medicamentum  exterminii,  nee 
inferorum  regnum  in  terra." 

Sap.  II.  23, 

'*  Quoniam  Deus  creavit  ho- 
minem  inexterminabilem,  et  ad 
imaginera  similitudinis  suae  fecit 
ilium." 

Sap.  III.  1—4. 

"  Justorum  autem  animae  in 
manu  Dei  sunt,  et  non  tanget 
illos  tormentum  mortis.  Visi 
sunt  oculis  insipientium  mori:  et 
aestimata  est  afflictio  exitus  illo- 
rum  :  et  quod  a  nobis  est  iter, 
exterminium :  illi  autem  sunt  in 
pace.  Et  si  coram  hominibus 
tormenta  passi  sunt,  spes  illorum 
immortalitate  plena  est." 

Sap.  VII.  2. 

"  —  decem  mensium  tempore 
coagulatus  sum  in  sanguine,  ex 
semine  hominis,  et  delectamento 
somni  conveniente." 

Eccli.  X.  13. 

**  Cum  enim  morietur  homo, 
hereditabit  serpentes,  et  bestias, 
et  vermes." 

Sap.  III.  4—6. 

"  Et  si  coram  hominibus  tor- 
menta passi  sunt,  spes  illorum 
immortalitate  plena  est.  In  pau- 
cis  vexati,  in  multis  bene  dispo- 
nentur  :  quoniam  Deus  tentavit 
eos,  et  invenit  illos  dignos  se. 
Tamquam  aurum  in  fornace  pro- 


Ibid.  Haeres.  LXIV.  31. 

"  —  id  quod  Sapientia  con- 
firmat  his  verbis  :  '  Creavit  enim 
ut  essent  omnia  Deus  ;  et  salu- 
tares  sunt  mundi  generationes. 
Nee  est  in  illis  medicamentum 
exitii.'  " 

Ibid.  34. 

"  Creavit  enim,  ait  Sapientia, 
hominem  in  incorruptione ;  ad 
imaginem  aeternitatis  suae  fecit 
ilium." 

Ibid.  36. 

"  Idem  vero  per  Salomonem 
in  eo  libro  qui  Sapientia  inscri- 
bitur  ostendit  ubi  :  '  Justorum,' 
inquit,  '  animae  in  manu  Dei 
sunt,  et  non  tanget  illos  tormen- 
tum. Visi  sunt  oculis  insipien- 
tum  mori,  et  aestimata  est  afflic- 
tio exitus  illorum,  et  quod  a  nobis 
est  iter,  exterminium.  Illi  autem 
sunt  in  pace,  et  spes  illorum  im- 
mortalitate plena  est.'  " 

Ibid.  39. 

"  — Christi  corpus  non  ex  vol- 
untate  viri,  ac  voluptate  somnique 
congressione  in  iniquitatibus  esse 
susceptum." 

Ibid. 

"  Quam  ob  causam  sapiens  ille 
Sirachitapronuntiat:  *  Cum  enim 
morietur  homo,  haereditabit  ser- 
pentes, et  bestias,  et  vermes.'  " 

Ibid.  48. 

"  Quam  vero  consentanea  iis 
de  martyribus  a  Salomone  pro- 
nuntiata  sint,  attendite.  Neque 
enim  aliarum  Scripturarum  testi- 
monio  caremus  :  'Deus,'  inquit, 
*  tentavit  eos,  et  invenit  eos  dig- 
nos se.    Tamquam  aurum  in  for- 


170 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   IV.   CENTURY. 


bavit  illosj  et  quasi  holocaust! 
hostiam  accepit  illos,  et  in  tem- 
pore erit  respectus  illorum." 


Sap.  I.  4. 

" —  quoniam  in  malevolam 
animam  non  introibit  sapientia, 
nee  habitabit  in  corpore  subdito 
peccatis." 

Sap.  IV.  12. 

"  Fascinatio  enim  nugacitatis 
obscurat  bona,  et  inconstantia 
concupiscentiae  transvertit  sen- 
sum  sine  raalitia." 

Sap.  IV.  8—12. 

"  Senectus  enim  venerabilis  est 
non  diutuma  etc." 

Sap.  IV.  13 — 14. 

"Consummatus  in  brevi,  ex- 
plevit  tempora  multa,  placita 
enim  erat  Deo  anima  illius: 
propter  hoc  properavit  educere 
ilium  de  medio  iniquitatum ; 
populi  autem  videntes,  et  non  in- 
telligentes,  nee  ponentes  in  prae- 
cordiis  talia  — ." 

Baruch  III.  36. 

"  Hie  est  Deus  noster,  et  non 
aestimabitur  alius  ad  versus  eum." 

Ibid.  37. 

"  Hie  adinvenit  omnem  viam 
disciplinae,  et  tradidit  illam 
Jacob  puero  suo,  et  Israel  dilecto 
suo." 


nace  probavit  illos ;  et  sicut 
holocaustum  suavitatis  accepit 
illos  ;  et  in  tempore  visitationis 
illorum,  etc'  Cura  antea  dixis- 
set :  '  Et  si  coram  hominibus 
tormenta  passi  sunt,  spes  illo- 
rum immortalitate  plena  est.  In 
paucis  correpti  magna  beneficia 
consequentur.'  " 

Ibid.  54. 

"  Praeterea  Salomon  :  *  In  ma- 
levolam,' inquit,  *  animam  non 
introibit  sapientia,  nee  habitabit 
in  corpore  obnoxio  peccato.'  " 

Ibid.  Haeres.  LXV.  i. 

"  Nam  in  illo  Scripturae  dictum 
illud  impletur  :  'Fascinatio  enim 
nugacitatis  obscurat  bona,  et  in- 
constantia concupiscentiae  trans- 
vertit mentem  sine  malitia." 

Ibid.  Haeres.  LXVII.  4. 

"  Hie  igitur  :  *  Senectus,'  in- 
quit,  '  venerabilis  non  longaeva, 
etc.'" 

Ibid. 

"Ut  autem  de  pueris  loqui 
ilium  appareat  statim  adjicit : 
*  Consummatus  in  brevi,  (quasi 
dicat :  mortuus  juvenis)  imple- 
vit  tempora  multa.  Placita  enim 
erat  Domino  anima  illius  :  prop- 
terea  festinavit  eum  ed4icere  de 
medio  malitiae." 

Ibid.  Haeres.  LXIX.  31. 

"  Alter  cum  ipso  minime  com- 
parabitur." 

Ibid. 

"  Quid  porro  ?  Ut  de  Filio  ser- 
monem  esse  cognoscas,  deinceps 
ista  subjecit :  *  Invenit  omnem 
viam  scientiae  et  dedit  illam.'  " 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 


171 


Ibid.  38. 

"  Post  haec  in  terris  visus  est, 
et  cum  hominibus  conversatus 
est." 

Ibid.  37—38. 

Ibid  38. 

Esther  XIII.  9. 

" —  et  dixit:  Domine,  Do- 
mine,  rex  omnipotens,  in  ditione 
enim  tua  cuncta  sunt  posita,  et 
non  est,  qui  possit  tuae  resistere 
voluntati,  si  decreveris  salvare 
Israel." 

Baruch  III.  37 — 38. 


Sap.  I.  7. 

"  Quoniam  spiritus  Domini  re- 
plevit  orbem  terrarum  :  et  hoc, 
quod  continet  omnia,  scientiam 
habet  vocis." 

Eccli.  XIV.  5. 

"  Qui  sibi  nequam  est,  cui  alii 
bonus  erit  ?  et  non  jucundabitur 
in  bonis  suis." 

Sap.  IX.  14. 

"  Cogitationes  enim  mortalium 
timidae,  et  incertae  providentiae 
nostrae  — ." 


Baruch  III.  38. 

"  Post  haec  in  terris  visus  est, 
et  cum  hominibus  conversatus 
est." 


Ibid. 

"  Tum  postea  ;  '  In  terra  visus 
est,  et  cum  hominibus  conversa- 
tus est'  " 

Ibid.  S3' 

Ibid. 55. 

Ibid.  Lib.  III.  Haeres.  LXX.  7. 

"  Sed  et  illud  proinde  certum, 
posse  ilium  quae  velit  efficere  : 
*  Nullus  est  enim  qui  ejus  volun- 
tati resistat.'  " 


Ibid.  Haeres.  LXXI.  3. 

*'  Qui  invenit  omnem  viam 
scientiae.  Exstitisse  vero  divina 
Scriptura  non  dubitat.  Nam 
quae  sequuntur  ante  ilium  exsti- 
tisse declarant.  Velut  quod  om- 
nem viam  scientiae  reperisse  di- 
catur,  deinde  in  terris  visus 
esse." 

Ibid.  Haeres.  LXXIV. 

"  Spiritus  enim  Domini  reple- 
vit  orbem  terrarum." 

Ibid  Haeres.  LXXVI.  Confut. 
VIII. 

"  Ecquis  igitur  illius  miserebi- 
tur,  qui  sibi  ipsi  malus,  nemini 
alteri  bonus  est  ? " 

Ibid.  LXXVI.  Confut.  XXXI. 

"  —  siquidem  divina  majestas, 
Patris  inquam  et  Filii  et  Spiritus 
Sancti,  angelorum  mentes  omnes 
longo  intervallo  superat,  nedum 
hominum  quorum  timidae  cogita- 
tiones." 

St.Epiph.Expositio  Fidei  XVL 

"  —  ac  denique  verus  ut  appa- 
reret  Filius,  et  illud  Propheta  va- 
ticinium  expleret :  '  Et  post  haec 
enim  in  terra  visus  est,  et  cum 
hominibus  conversatus  est.' " 


172 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   IV.  CENTURY. 


The  frequency  with  which  this  passage  is  quoted  by  the 
Fathers  manifests  that  they  considered  it  a  classic  text  to  prove 
the  Incarnation. 


St,  Epiph.  Ancoratus  II. 

" '  Initium  quippe  f  ornicationis 
est  exquisitio  idolorum,'  ut  ait 
Scriptura." 

Ibid.  XII. 

"  Etenim  cum  nos  Scriptura 
reprehendit  his  verbis  :  *  Quae 
praecepta  tibi  sunt,  haec  cogita  ; 
neque  arcanis  et  occultis  tibi 
opus  est :  et  altiora  te  ne  quae- 
sieris,  ac  profundiora  te  ne  in- 
quiras.'  " 

Ibid.  XXIV. 

*'  —  et  creaturas  a  Creatore 
discernentes,  hunc  in  modum 
(tres  pueri  in  fornace)  locuti 
sunt  :  '  Benedicite  omnia  opera 
Domini  Domino.'  " 

He  repeats  this  passage  and  other  portions  of  the  Benedic- 
tus  in  the  twenty-fourth  and  twenty-fifth  Chapters. 

Sap.  X.  21.  Ibid.  XXXI. 

" — quoniam  sapientia  aperuit  " — quique  balbutientium  lin- 

os mutorum,  et  linguas  infantium      guam  disertam  praestitit,  etc." 
fecit  disertas." 


Sap.  XIV.  12. 

"  Initium  enim  fornicationis 
est  exquisitio  idolorum — ." 

Eccli.  III.   22. 

"  Altiora  te  ne  quaesieris,  et 
fortiora  te  ne  scrutatus  fueris  : 
sed  quae  praecepit  tibi  Deus,  ilia 
cogita  semper,  et  in  pluribus 
operibus  ejus  ne  fueris  curiosus." 


Dan.  Ill,  57, 

"  Benedicite  omnia  opera  Do- 
mini Domino — ." 


Sap,  VIII.  2, 

"Hanc  amavi,  et  exquisivi  a 
juventute  mea,  et  quaesivi  spon- 
sam  mihi  eam  assumere,  et  ama- 
tor  factus  sum  formae  illius." 

Baruch  III.  38. 

"  Post  haec  in  terris  visus  est, 
et  cum  hominibus  conversatus 
est." 


Esther  XIII.  9. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Ibid.  XLII. 

"Ad  haec  Salomon  aliam  quam- 
dam  sapientiam  appellat :  'Ama- 
vi,' inquit,  *  pulchritudinem  ejus 
et  eam  mihi  sponsam  duxi.'  " 

Ibid.  LXXVIII. 

"  Christus  autem  Deus  e  coelo, 
verbum  e  Maria  caro  factum  est 
hominemque  suscepit,  et  nobis- 
cum,  ut  ait  Scriptura,  versatus 
est." 

Ibid.  XCVI. 

(Already  quoted.) 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   IV.   CENTURY.  173 

St.    Epiph.    Epist.    ad    Joan. 

Sap.  II.  23.  Episcopum  Hieros.  Cap.  VI. 

"  Quoniam   Deus   creavit   ho-  "  Dicit  enim  (Salomon)  in  Sa- 

minem  inexterminabilem,  et  ad  pientia  quae  titulo  ejus  inscribi- 
imaginem  similitudinis  suae  fecit  tur  :  '  Creavit  Deus  incorruptum 
ilium."  hominem,  et  imaginem  suae  pro- 

prietatis  dedit  ei.'  " 
Here,  in  the  clearest  terms,  Epiphanius  makes  known  that 
his  exclusion  of  a  book  from  the  list  of  those  called  canonical,  was 
not  equivalent  to  denying  it  the  authority  of  divine  Scripture. 
He  certainly  believed  that  he  was  quoting  the  revealed  word, 
when  he  introduces  these  passages  in  the  solemn  formulae,  "  ut 
ait  Scriptura,"  "  Scriptum  est,"  etc.  Neither  did  he  quote 
these  passages  at  random,  not  adverting  to  the  fact  that  they 
were  not  in  the  Canon.  He  often  specifies  the  book,  and  speaks 
of  the  authors.  We  believe  that  had  the  other  deuterocanon- 
ical  books  been  equally  serviceable  for  dogmatic  argument,  he 
would  have  drawn  also  from  them  as  from  Scriptural  sources. 
At  least,  our  adversaries  must  admit  that  Epiphanius  is  a 
staunch  supporter  of  the  divinity  of  at  least  three  deutero- 
canonical  books,  and  also  of  the  deuterocanonical  fragments  of 
Daniel,  and  that  his  exclusion  of  the  deuterocanonical  books 
from  the  list  then  termed  canonical,  cannot  be  construed  to 
signify  non-inspiration  of  the  same. 

Among  the  adversaries  of  the  deuterocanonical  books  is 
placed  Gregory  Nazianzenus.* 

*Gregory  Nazianzenus,  takes  his  distinctive  title  from  Nazianzus,  a  small 
town  in  the  south-west  of  Cappadocia,  which  is  not  known  to  the  early 
geographers,  and  owes  its  chief  importance  to  its  connection  with  our  author. 
It  is  impossible  to  fix  with  exactness  the  date  of  his  birth ;  according  to  the 
BoUandists  it  should  be  placed  before  the  year  300.  His  father  at  first  an 
infidel,  was  converted  by  his  wife  Nonna,  and  afterwards  was  Bishop  of 
Nazianzus ;  his  mother  St.  Nonna,  considered  the  infant  Gregory  as  given 
her  in  answer  to  her  prayers. 

Gregory  studied  at  Csesarea,  Alexandria  and  Athens,  and  became  proficient 
in  Greek  oratory  and  poetry.  He  contracted  in  youth  a  friendship  for  St. 
Basil,  which  lasted  through  life.  The  two  sought  together  the  solitude  of 
the  desert,  whence  Gregory  was  afterwards  summoned  to  assist  his  aged 
father  in  the  cares  of  the  Episcopate.  He  was  soon  after  ordained  priest  by 
his  father,  and  then,  bishop  by  St.  Basil.  Gregory,  however,  soon  after 
abandoned  his  see  for  the  solitude,  but  emerged  thence  again  at  the  instance 
of  his  decrepit  father,  and  executed  the  episcopal  functions  in  Nazianzus 
without  assuming  the  name  of  bishop.  After  the  death  of  his  parent,  he 
again  sought  the  desert,  but  was  brought  thence  by  his  friends,  and  placed  in 
the  See  of  Constantinople.  He  was  favored  by  Theodosius  the  Great,  and 
resisted  the  swarming  heresies  of  the  time,  chief  among  which  was  the  heresy 
of  Ai-ius. 

The  perfidy  and  envy  of  his  enemies  induced  him  to  resign  again  the  See 


174         THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 

Two  passages  in  Gregory's  works  form  the  basis  of  his 
pretended  opposition  to  the  deuterocanonical  books.  The 
first  passage  occurs  in  Carmen  I.  13: 

"  Accipe  a  me  selectum  hunc,  amice,  numerum, 

Sunt  quidem  historic!  libri  omnes  duodecim, 

Antiquioris  Hebraicae  sapientiae  : 

Primus  Genesis,  deinde  Exodus  et  Leviticus ; 

Postea  Numeri,  tum  Deuteronomium. 

Deinde  Josue  et  Judices:  Ruth  octavus  est. 

Nonus  decimusque  liber,  res  gestae  Regum, 

Et  Paralipomena  ;  Esdram  babes  ultimo  loco. 

Quinque  versibus  scripti  sunt,  quorum  primus  Job, 

Postea  David,  tum  Salomonis  tres, 

Ecclesiastes,  Canticum,  et  Proverbia. 

Similiter  quinque  Spiritus  prophetici ; 

Ac  uno  quidem  continentur  libri  duodecim  : 

Osee,  et  Amos,  et  Micheas  tertius  ; 

Deinde  Joel,  postea  Jonas,  Abdias, 

Nahum,  Habacuc  et  Sophonias, 

Aggseus,  deinde  Zacharias,  Malachias, 

Uno  hi  continentur  libro  :  secundo  Isaias, 

Tertio  qui  vocatus  est  Jeremias  ab  infantia, 

Quarto  Ezechiel,  quinto  Danielis  gratia. 

Veteres  quidem  numeravi  duos  et  virginti  libros 

Hebraeorum  elementorum  numero  respondentes." 

After  enumerating  in  succession  all  the  books  of  the  New 
Testament,  excepting  the  Apocalypse,  he  concludes : 

' '  Si  quid  est  extra  hunc  numerum  non  est  ex  germanis  Scripturis. " 

In  the  celebrated  Carmen  ad  Seleucum,  a  Canon  occurs  dif- 
fering from  the  foregoing  only  in  this,  that  he  admits  in  it 
Esther,  which  did  not  appear  in  the  first  Carmen,  and  also  the 
Apocalypse  with  the  qualification  : 

"  Apocalypsim  autem  Johannis 
Quidam  vero  admittunt,  pars  vero  major 
Spuriam  asserunt." 

Basing  their  judgment  on  this  difference  in  the  Canons,  and 
on  the  testimony  of  some  codices,  some  have  denied  to 
Gregory  the  authorship  of  the  Carmen  ad  Seleucum ;  and  have 
attributed  it  to  Amphilochius,  Bishop  of  Iconium  (344 — 394), 
the  friend  of  Gregory,  called  by  him  the  "irreproachable  pontiff," 
the  "  angel,"  and  "  hero  of  truth,"  The  opinion  rests  princi- 
pally on  the  authority  of  Combefis,  the  editor  of  Amphilochius' 

of  Constantinople,  and  he  finally  sought  the  solitude  of  the  desert  again,  where 
he  died  in  389  A.  D. 

Gregory  was  by  nature  severe,  and  leaned  to  the  life  of  an  ascetic.  His 
vast  erudition,  caused  Jerome  to  journey  to  Constantinople  to  hear  him. 
His  writings  are  at  times  excessively  ornate,  and  sometimes  uncritical.  His 
chief  works  are  fifty -five  orations,  a  great  number  of  letters,  and  many  poems. 


THE   CANON  OF  THE   IV.  CENTURY.  175 

works,  and  in  my  judgment  has  little  foundation.  I  see  no 
good  reason  for  denying  to  Gregory  this  Carmen,  since  the 
presence  of  Esther  and  the  Apocalypse  therein  would  simply 
show  that  Gregory,  in  endeavoring  to  follow  the  trend  of 
religious  thought,  could  not  be  consistent  in  excluding  books 
which  the  Church  considered  divine. 

Gregory  concludes  his  canon  in  the  Carmen  ad  Seleucum 
with  these  words : 

— "His  certissimus 
Canon  tibi  sit  divinarum  Scripturarum." 

It  would  seem,  at  first  sight,  that  these  testimonies  manifest 
a  certain  opposition  to  the  deuterocanonical  books.  How- 
ever, in  the  Carmen  ad  Seleucum,  252 — 257,  Gregory  declares 
that  he  allows  to  the  deuterocanonical  books  a  sort  of  middle 
place  between  uninspired  and  inspired  Scripture : 

— "Non  omnis  liber  pro  certo  habendus 
Qui  venerandum  Scripturse  nomen  praefert. 
Sunt  enim,  sunt  (ut  nonnunquam  fit)  inscripti  falsi  nominis 
Libri :  nonnuUi  quidem  intermedii  sunt  ac  mcini, 
Ut  ita  dixerim,  veritatis  doctrinm  ; 
Alii  vero  spurii  et  magnopere  periculosi." 

Gregory  accorded  to  the  deuterocanonical  books  a  middle 
rank.  He  made  a  distinction  much  like  that  made  of  old  by 
the  Jews  in  assigning  an  inferior  degree  of  inspiration  to  the 
products  of  the  "  FiHa  vocis."  This  was  an  erroneous  expla- 
nation of  a  fact.  The  fact  was,  that  these  books  bore  the  name 
of  divine  Scripture ;  they  entered  into  the  deposit  of  faith  of 
the  Church  ;  the  faithful  learned  them  by  memory  ;  Gregory 
himself,  as  we  shall  see  by  numerous  passages  from  his  writ- 
ings, had  drunk  deeply  from  these  fountains. 

On  the  other  hand,  they  were  not  in  the  official  list  of  the 
Synagogue.  This  alone  was  sufficient  to  cast  such  doubt 
upon  them  with  the  extremely  conservative  Cappadocian 
school  of  which  Gregory  is  a  representative  exponent,  that 
they  stopped  short  of  inserting  them  in  the  Canon  ;  at  the  same 
time  they  honored  them  as  sources  of  divine  truth. 

The  other  Cappadocian  Fathers,  Basil,  Gregory  of  Nyssa, 
and  Caesarius,  frequently  cite  Wisdom  and  Ecclesiasticus,  as 
they  were  the  books  most  fitted  for  dogmatic  argument. 

Basil  quotes  Judith : 

Lib.  De  Spiritu  Sancto  VIII. 
Judith  IX.  4.  19. 

"  Tu  enim  fecisti  priora,  et  ilia  "  Sicuti    Judith  :     *  Cogitasti,' 

post  ilia  cogitasti,  et  hoc  factum  inquit, '  et  praesto  fuerunt  omnia 
est  quod  ipse  voluisti."  quae  cogitasti.'  " 


176 


THE  CANON   OF  THE   IV.  CENTURY. 


II.  Maccab.  VII.  i. 

"  Contigit  autem  et  septem 
fratres  una  cum  matre  sua  appre- 
hensos  compelli  a  rege  edere 
contra  fas  carnes  porcinas,  fla- 
gris,  et  taureis  cruciatos." 


How  deeply  Gregory  had 
usuage  of  the  Church  can  be 
lated  passages : 

Dan.  XIII.  5. 

"  Et  constituti  sunt  de  populo 
duo  senes  judices  in  illo  anno  : 
de  quibus  locutus  est  Dominus  : 
Quia  egressa  est  iniquitas  de 
Babylone  a  senioribus  judicibus, 
qui  videbantur  regere  populum." 

Eccli.  III.  II. 

"  Benedictio  patris  firmat  do- 
mos  filiorum — ." 

Sap.  V.  15. 

"  — quoniara  spes  impii  tam- 
quam  lanugo  est,  quae  a  vento 
tollitur,  etc." 

Sap.  XVI.  13. 

"Tu  es  enim,  Domine,  qui 
vitae  et  mortis  babes  potestatem, 
et  deducis  ad  portas  mortis,  et 
reducis — ." 

Eccli.  XXXVIII.  16. 


Epist.  VI.   ad    Nectarii    uxo- 
rem,  i. 

"  Maccabaeorum  mater  septem 
filiorum  mortem  conspexit,  nee 
ingemuit,  nee  ignobiles  lacrymas 
effudit,  sed  gratias  agens  Deo 
quod  videret  eos  igne  et  ferro  et 
acerbissimis  verberibus  e  vinculis 
carnis  exsolvi,  Deo  quidem  pro- 
bata fuit,  Celebris  vero  habita  est 
apud  homines." 

been  influenced  by  the  practical 
learned  from  the  following  col- 

St.  Greg.  Naz.  Orat.  II.  64. 

"  —  nempe  quod  egressa  est 
iniquitas  ex  Babylone  a  seniori- 
bus judicibus  qui  populum  re- 
gere videbantur." 


Ibid.  96. 

"  Benedictio  enim  Patris  firmat 
domos  filiorum." 

Orat.  V.  28. 

"  —  tamquam  lanugo  quae  a 
vento  disjicitur — ." 

Ibid.  29. 

"  Ecquis  novit  num  Deus  qui 
solvit  compeditos,  gravemque  et 
'  humis  vergentem  a  portis  mortis 
in  altutn  subvehit — .'  " 

Orat.  VII.  I. 


"Fill, in mortuum produc lacry-  "Super     mortuum    plora,     et 

mas,  et  quasi  dira  passus,  incipe      quasi  dirapassus,  incipeplorare." 
plorare,  etc." 


Sap.  III.  15. 

"  Bonorum  enim  laborum  glo- 
riosus  est  fructus,  etc." 


Ibid.  14. 

"  Bonorum  enim  laborum  glo- 
riosus  est  fructus." 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   IV.   CENTURY. 


177 


Sap,  V.  10 — II. 

"  —  et  tamquam  navis,  quae 
pertransit  fluctuantem  aquam  : 
cujus,  cum  praeterierit,  non  est 
vestigium  invenire,  neque  semi- 
tam  carinae  illius  in  fluctibus  : 
aut  tamquam  avis,  quae  trans- 
volat  in  aere,  cujus  nullum  inve- 
nitur  argumentum  itineris,  etc." 

Sap.  I.  4. 

"  —  quoniam  in  malevolam 
animam  non  introibit  sapientia, 
nee  habitabit  in  corpore  subdito 
peccatis." 

Eccli.  VI.  14—15. 

"  Amicus  fidelis,  protectio  for- 
tis  :  qui  autem  invenit  ilium,  in- 
venit  thesaurum.  Amico  fideli 
nulla  est  comparatio,  et  non  est 
digna  ponderatio  auri  et  argenti 
contra  bonitatem  fidei  illius." 

Eccli.  I.  2. 


Ibid.  19. 

"  Insomnium  sumus,  minime 
consistens,  spectrum  quoddam, 
quod  teneri  non  potest,  avis 
praetereuntis  volatus,  navis  in 
mari  vestigium  non  habens,  pul- 
vis,  vapor,  ros  matutinus,  flos 
momento  nascens  et  momento 
marcescens." 

Orat.  IX.  2. 

"  In  malignam  enim  animam 
non  ingressuram  sapientiam  recte 
dictum  est." 


Oral.  XI.  I. 

"Amico  fideli  nulla  est  com- 
paratio ;  nee  ulla  est  digna  pon- 
deratio contra  bonitatem  illius. 
Amicus  fidelis,  protectio  fortis." 


Orat.  XIV.  30. 

"  Sed  quis  arenam  maris  et 
pluviae  guttas  et  abyssi  profun- 
ditatem  metiri...  queat  ?" 


"Arenam  maris,  et  pluviae 
guttas,  et  dies  saeculi  quis  dinu- 
meravit  ?  Altitudinem  coeli,  et 
latitudinem  terrae,  et  profundum 
abyssi  quis  dimensus  est  ?  " 

The  fifteenth  oration  of  St.  Gregory  is  in  praise  of  the  Mac- 
cabees, whose  feast  the  Church  celebrated  in  his  day.  Fre- 
quently in  the  course  of  the  oration  he  adverts  to  data  taken 
from  the  first  and  second  Books  of  Maccabees.  The  very  fact 
that  he  composed  such  an  oration,  shows  clearly,  that  he  re- 
cognized the  books.  Cornely's  animadversion  here  that 
Gregory  has  in  mind  only  the  fourth  book,  is  erroneous.  (Cor- 
nely,  Introduc.  Gen.  p.  98,  note  18.)  Gregory  in  the  second 
paragraph  speaks  of  a  book :  qui  rationem  perturbationibus 
animi  imperare  docet,  which  evidently  refers  to  the  apocryphal 
fourth  book  of  Maccabees,  but  this  would  only  show  that  he 
united  the  fourth  with  the  others  in  collecting  his  argument. 
Most  of  the  data  of  the  oration  are  taken  from  the  first  and 
second  Books  of  Maccabees. 

L 


178 


THE   CATJON   OF   THE   IV.   CENTURY. 


Eccli.  XI.  30. 

"  Ante  mortem  ne  laudes  ho- 
minem  quemquam,  quoniam  in 
filiis  suis  agnoscitur  vir." 

Baruch  II.  12. 

"  —  peccavimus,  impie  egi- 
mus,  inique  gessimus,  Domine 
Deus  noster,  in  omnibus  justitiis 
tuis." 

Dan.  XIV.  33. 

"  Dixitque  angelus  Domini  ad 
Habacuc  :  Fer  prandium,  quod 
habes,  in  Babylonem  Danieli,  qui 
est  in  lacu  leonura." 

Sap.  XL  21. 

"Sed  et  sine  his  uno  spiritu 
poterant  occidi  persecutionem 
passi  ab  ipsis  factis  suis,  et  dis- 
persi  per  spiritura  virtutis  tuae  : 
sed  omnia  in  mensura,  et  numero 
et  pondere  disposuisti." 

Dan.  XIII. 


Sap.  I.  7. 

"  Quoniam  spiritus  Domini  re- 
plevit  orbem  terrarum,  et  hoc, 
quod  continet  omnia,  scientiam 
habet  vocis." 

Orat.  XXIX.  17.     He  calls 
tatis,"  evidently  assuming  the 

Baruch  III.  36,  38. 

"  Hie  est  Deus  noster,  et  non 
aestimabitur  alius  adversus  eum. 

Post  haec  in  terris  visus  est, 
et  cum  hominibus  conversatus 
est." 


Orat.  XVI.  3. 

"  Nam  si,  ut  ego  cum  Salo- 
mone  sentio,  hominem  ante  mor- 
tem beatum  praedicare  non  opor- 
tet." 

Ibid.  12. 

"  —  adjungam  :  Peccavimus, 
inique  egimus,  impietatem  feci- 
mus." 

Orat.  XVIII.  30. 

" —  aut  per  prophetam  in  sub- 
lime raptum  satians,  ut  Danie- 
lem,  antea  cum  fame  in  lacu  pre- 
meretur." 

Orat.  XXIV.  i. 

" —  atque  ut  hinc  initium  du- 
camus,  quam  commode,  pulchris- 
que  Dei  mensuris,  qui  omnia  cum 
pondere  et  mensura  constituit  ac 
moderatur,  etc." 

Ibid.  10. 

"  (Deus)  qui  et  Susannam  mor- 
tis periculo  liberavit,  et  Theclam 
servavit ;  illam  a  saevis  seniori- 
bus,  hanc  a  tyranno  ipsius  proco 
et  a  matri  adhuc  crudeliori." 

Orat.  XXVIII.  8. 

" —  ait  Scriptura '  Spiri- 
tus Domini  replevit  orbem  ter- 
rarum.' " 

the  Son  of  God  "  Imago  boni- 
phrase  from  Wisdom  VII.  26. 

Orat.  XXX.  13. 

*'  *  Hie  Deus  tuus,  et  non  aesti- 
mabitur alius  praeter  eum.'  Et 
paucis  interjectis  :  *  Post  haec  in 
terra  visus  est,  et  cum  hominibus 
conversatus  est.'  " 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   IV.   CENTURY. 


179 


Sap.  VII.  22. 

"Est  enim  in  ilia  spiritus  in- 
telligentiae,  sanctus,  unicus,  mul- 
tiplex, subtilis,  disertus,  mobi- 
lis,  etc." 

Sap.  I.  4. 

**  Quoniam  in  malevolam  ani- 
mam  non  introibit  sapientia,  nee 
habitabit  in  corpore  subdito  pec- 
catis." 

Sap.  III.  II. 

**  Sapientiam  enim,  et  discipli- 
nam  qui  abjicit,  infelix  est :  et 
vacua  est  spes  illorum,  et  labores 
sine  fructu,  et  inutilia  opera 
eorum." 

Eccli.  V.  14. 

"Si  est  tibi  intellectus,  re- 
sponde  proximo  :  sin  autem,  sit 
manus  tua  super  os  tuum,  ne 
capiaris  in  verbo  indisciplinato, 
et  confundaris." 

Eccli.  VII.  15. 

"  Noli  verbosus  esse  in  multi- 
tudine  presbyterorum." 

Eccli.  XI.  27. 

"  In  die  bonorura  ne  immemor 
sis  malorum,  et  in  die  malorum 
ne  immemor  sis  bonorum  — ." 

Dan.  XIII.  5. 

"  Et  constituti  sunt  de  populo 
duo  senes  judices  in  illo  anno,  de 
quibus  locutus  est  Dominus : 
Quia  egressa  est  iniquitas  de 
Babylone  a  senioribus  judicibus, 
qui  videbantur  regere  populum." 

Dan.  XIII.  42. 

"  Exclamavit  autem  voce  mag- 
na Susanna,  et  dixit  :  Deus 
aeterne,  qui  absconditorum  es 
cognitor,  qui  nosti  omnia  ante- 
quam  fiant." 


Orat.  XXXI.  29. 

"Spiritus  intelligens,  multi- 
plex, apertus,  clarus,  incontami- 
natus,  minimeque  impeditus, 
etc." 

Orat.  XXXII.  12. 

" —  quoniam  in  malevolam 
animam  non  introibit  sapientia." 


Ibid.  20. 

"  —  ac  Deus  faxit  ne  quid  un- 
quam  huic  occupationi  praever- 
tendum  ducam,  ne  alioqui  ab  ipsa 
Sapientia  miser  appeller,  ut  sapi- 
entiam et  eruditionem  spernens 
ac  pro  nihilo  ducens." 

Ibid.  21. 

"  Si  est  tibi  sermo  prudentiae, 
inquit  ille,  nee  quisquam  prohi- 
bebit :  sin  minus,  haereat  vincu- 
lum labiis  tuis." 

Ibid. 

"  Noli  celer  esse  in  verbis,  ad- 
monet  Sapiens," 

Orat.  XXXV.  3. 
"  In  die  enim  laetitiae,  inquit, 
malorum  oblivio  est." 

Orat.  XXXVI.  3. 

" —  juxta  Danielem  egressa 
est  iniquitas  a  senioribus  Baby- 
lonicis,  qui  Israelem  regere  existi- 
mabantur." 


Ibid  7. 

"  — imo  non  videor,  sed  per- 
spicuus  atque  manifestus  sum  ei 
qui  omnia  priusquam  oriantur 
novit." 


180 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   IV.  CENTURY. 


Eccli.  III.  II. 

"Benedictio  patris  firmat  do- 
mes filiorum  :  maledictio  autem 
matris  eradicat  fundamenta." 

Eccli.  III.  12. 

"  Ne  glorieris  in  contumelia 
patris,  etc." 

Eccli.  I.  1 6. 

"  Initium  sapientiae,  timor  Do- 
mini, et  cum  fidelibus  in  vulva 
concreatus  est,  cum  electis  femi- 
nis  graditur,  et  cum  justis  et 
fidelibus  agnoscitur." 

Sap.  III.  7. 

"  Fulgebunt  justi,  et  tamquam 
scintillae  in  arundineto  discur- 
rent." 

Eccli.  XXXII.  3. 

"  — ut  laeteris  propter  illos,  et 
omamentum  gratiae  accipias  co- 
ronam,  et  dignationem  conse- 
quaris  corrogationis." 

Sap.  IV.  8. 

"  Senectus  enim  venerabilis  est 
non  diuturna,  neque  annorum 
numero  computata  :  cani  autem 
sunt  sensus  hominis." 

II.  Maccab.  VII.  i. 

"  Contigit  autem  et  septem 
fratres  una  cum  matre  sua  appre- 
hensos  compelli  a  rege  edere 
contra  fas  carnes  porcinas,  fla- 
gris,  et  taureis  cruciatos." 

Sap,  II.  24. 

"  Invidia  autem  diaboli  mors 
introivit,  etc." 


Orat.  XXXVII.  6. 

"  Item  alio  loco  :  '  Benedictio 
patris  firmat  domos  filiorum  ; 
maledictio  autem  matris  eradicat 
fundamenta.'  " 

Ibid.  18. 

"  Quod  si  hoc  etiam  probas  : 
'  Fili,  ne  glorieris  de  ignominia 
patris.'  " 

Orat.  XXXIX.  8. 

"  Unde  Salomon  nobis  legem 
statuit :  'Principium  sapientiae,' 
inquit,  '  posside  sapientiam.* 
Quidnam  vocat  hoc  principium 
sapientiae  ?     '  Timorem.' " 

Orat.  XL.  6. 

" — quo  tempore  nimirum  justi 
fulgebunt  sicut  sol." 

Ibid.  18. 

*'  Honore  eum  complectere  ut 
te  ornet,  capitique  tuo  gratiarum 
coronam  nectat." 

Orat.  XLIII.  23. 

"  Quis  prudentia  perinde  canus 
erat,  etiam  ante  canitiem  ?  Quan- 
doquidem  hac  re  senectutem 
Salomon  quoque  definivit." 

Ibid.  74. 

"  Mitto  septem  Maccabaeorum 
dimicationem  qui  cum  sacerdote 
et  matre  in  sanguine  atque  omnis 
generis  tormentis  consummati 
sunt." 

Orat.  XLIV.  4. 

"  Quoniam  autem  invidia  dia- 
boli mors  in  mundum  introivit, 
etc." 


The  reference  to  Judith  V.  6,  in  Orat.  XLV.  15  :  "quod  et 
semen  Chaldaicum  sublatum  atque  oppressum  Scriptura  vocat," 
is  somewhat  uncertain. 


THE   CANON    OF   THE   IV.  CENTURY. 


181 


Eccli.  III.  n. 

"  Benedictio  patris  firmat  do- 
mes filiorum  :  maledictio  autem 
matris  eradicat  fundamenta." 


Baruch  III.  38. 

"  Post  haec  in  terris  visus  est, 
et  cum  hominibus  conversatus 
est." 


St.  Greg.  Epist.  LXI. 

"Ita  fiet  ut  ab  ea  non  modo 
pecunias  habeatis,  sed  maternam 
etiam  benedictionem,  filiorum 
domos  fulcientem,  consequam- 
ini." 

Epist.  CII. 

"  — atque  ad  haec  verba  con- 
fugientes  :  '  Post  haec  in  terra 
visus  est,  et  cum  hominibus  con- 
versatus est.'  " 


Eccli.  IV.  32. 

"  Noli  resistere  contra  faciem 
potentis,  nee  coneris  contra  ic- 
tum  fluvii." 


Eccli.  XXXI.  32. 

**  Aequa  vita  hominibus  vinum 
in  sobrietate:  si  bibas  illud  mod- 
erate, eris  sobrius." 


Epist.  CLXXVIII. 

"  Porro  non  esse  vi  cohiben- 
dum  fluminis  cursum,  paroemia 
quoque  ipsa  docet." 

Epist.  CLXXXI. 

"Sin  autem  tibi  praestantiore 
monitore  opus  est,  illud  quidem 
monet  Salomon  ut  cum  consilio 
vinum  bibas,  ne  mundi  hujus 
temulentia  et  vertigine  agaris." 

These  references  leave  no  doubt  that  Gregory  believed  that 
he  was  there  quoting  divine  Scripture.  The  whole  Church 
used  them,  committed  them  to  memory,  proved  and  illustrated 
their  dogmas  by  them.  This  influence  was  so  powerful  that 
even  the  most  conservative  came  under  it,  and,  as  we  shall  see, 
even  those  who  wished  to  turn  the  tide  of  this  tradition  were 
inconsistent.  Another  oriental  authority  of  this  period  that  is 
objected  against  us  is  the  60th  canon  of  the  Council  of 
Laodicea.  This  canon  explicitly  defines  that  the  books  to  be 
read  in  the  Church  are  those  which  we  now  comprehend  in  the 
protocanonical  class.  The  date  of  the  Council  of  Laodicea  is 
uncertain,  but  it  is  generally  believed  to  have  been  celebrated 
about  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century.  Some  have  doubted 
the  genuinity  of  the  60th  canon  (Herbst,  Vincenzi,  Malou, 
Danko),  but  as  it  is  recognized  by  Hefele,  Conciliengesch.  I.  p. 
749 — 75 1>  we  shall  not  base  our  treatment  of  it  upon  its  doubt- 
ful character.  Admitting  all  its  claims,  it  simply  establishes 
that  some  bishops  of  Phrygia  in  a  particular  council  refused 
to  allow  to  be  read  publicly  in  the  Church  any  book  excepting 
those  that  were  absolutely  certain.  We  are  not  endeavoring 
to  prove  that  the  position  of  protocanonical  and  deuterocanon- 
ical  books  were  equal  in  the  early  ages  of  the  Church.     Their 


182         THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 

equality  was  wrought  by  the  Council  of  Trent.  What  we  wish 
to  show  is  that  these  books  were  known  to  the  early  Christians, 
venerated  by  them,  committed  to  memory  by  them,  and  con- 
sidered by  them  as  the  inspired  word  of  God. 

The  Council  in  Trullo,  which  the  Greeks  hold  to  be 
oecumenical,  received  the  Canons  of  the  Council  of  Laodicea, 
but,  as  they  also  received  the  Canons  of  the  Council  of  Carthage, 
they  evidently  intended  that  the  decree  concerning  the  canonical 
Scriptures  should  be  modified  in  accordance  with  the  complete 
Canon  of  the  Council  of  Carthage. 

The  Greeks  also  in  the  Council  in  Trullo  received  various 
Apocryphal  documents  of  the  fifth  century  called  the  Canons 
of  the  Apostles.  The  85th  canon  of  this  collection  is  some- 
times cited  against  us,  as  it  does  not  contain  any  of  the  deu- 
terocanonical  books,  save  the  books  of  Maccabees.  This  canon 
can  have  no  weight  since  it  embraces  three  books  of  Macca- 
bees, two  epistles  of  St.  Clement  of  Rome,  and  the  eight  books 
of  the  Constitutiones  Apostolorum. 

The  Council  in  Trullo  in  receiving  this  Canon  could  not 
have  excluded  the  Canon  of  the  Council  of  Carthage,  whose 
decrees  and  canons  it  ratified.  In  fact,  the  Council  in  Trullo 
expressly  stated  that  the  Constitutiones  Apost.  were  adul- 
terated, and  hence  not  to  be  read.  It  seems,  however,  due  to 
this  canon  that  the  Greeks,  even  to  this  day,  recognize  as 
canonical  three  books  of  Maccabees. 

We  can  scarcely  expect  the  guiding  hand  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  in  the  members  who  composed  the  Council  in  Trullo. 

One  who  candidly  examines  the  data  here  presented  must 
admit  that  the  Oriental  Church  during  the  fourth  and  fifth 
centuries  recognized  and  used  the  deuterocanonical  books  as 
divine  Scripture. 

Turning  now  from  the  East  to  the  west,  we  meet  the  first 
objection  taken  from  the  writings  of  St.  Hilary.*  The  objec- 
tion is  found  in  the  fifteenth  paragraph  of  his  Prologue  on  the 
Book  of  Psalms.  After  seeking  mystic  reasons  for  the  number 
eight  in  the  Scriptures,  he  proceeds  as  follows  : 

*St.  Hilary  was  born  in  Poitiers  in  France  in  the  opening  years  of  the 
fourth  century.  His  parents  were  pagans  of  noble  rank.  They  procured 
for  their  son  every  educational  advantage  ;  and  the  youth,  applying  himself 
with  diligence  soon  came  to  be  regarded  as  the  most  learned  man  of  his  age. 
His  reading  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  brought  him  to  recognize  the  truth  of  the 
Christian  faith,  which  he,  his  wife,  and  child  Abra  embraced.  He  was  con- 
secrated Bishop  of  Poitiers  in  350,  or  355  and  became  the  staunch  defender  of 
the  Church  against  Arianism.  The  Arian  Saturninus  of  Aries  banished 
Hilary  to  Phrygia.    He  was  called  from  his  exile  to  be  present  at  the  Council 


THE   CANON   OF   THE"  IV.   CENTURY.  183 

"  And  this  is  the  cause  that  the  law  of  the  Old  Testament  is 
divided  into  22  books,  that  they  might  agree  with  the  number 
of  letters.  These  books  are  arranged  according  to  the  traditions 
of  the  ancients,  so  that  five  are  of  Moses,  the  sixth  is  of  Jesus 
Nave,  the  seventh  is  Judges  and  Ruth,  the  first  and  second  of 
Kings  form  the  eighth ;  the  third  and  fourth  (of  Kings)  form  the 
ninth  ;  the  two  books  of  Paralipomenon  form  the  tenth ;  the  dis- 
courses of  the  days  of  Ezra  form  the  eleventh ;  the  book  of 
Psalms,  the  twelfth ;  Solomon's  proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  and  the 
Canticle  of  Canticles  form  the  thirteenth,  fourteenth  and 
fifteenth  ;  the  twelve  Prophets  form  the  sixteenth  ;  while  Isaiah, 
then  Jeremiah,  the  Lamentations  and  the  Epistle,  Daniel, 
Ezechiel,  Job,  and  Esther  complete  the  number  of  twenty-two 
books."  Hilary  gives  only  the  protocanonical  works,  and  then 
continues : 

"  To  some  it  has  seemed  good  to  add  Tobias  and  Judith, 
and  thus  constitute  24  books  according  to  the  Greek  alpha- 
bet, etc." 

We  see  here  an  excessive  mysticism  impelling  a  man  to 
reject  or  admit  a  book  for  the  sole  purpose  of  completing 
a  mystic  number.  This  tendency  had  been  brought  into 
patristric  thought  by  Origen  and  the  Alexandrian  school. 
Hilary  does  not  reject  the  deuterocanonical  books,  but  con- 
siders the  protocanonical  as  forming  a  class  by  themselves. 
Hilary's  weak,  unsubstantial  arguments  are  attributable  to  the 
man  impressed  by  the  spirit  of  his  age.  The  great  current  of 
tradition  is  greater  than  any  one  man,  and  drew  Hilary  with  it, 
so  that  we  find  him  ranking  the  deuterocanonical  books  on  an 
equal  footing  with  the  others,  as  the  following  quotations  will 
show : 

Eccli.  I.  33.  St.  Hilary  Pral.  in  Ps,  20. 

"Fili,  concupiscens  sapientiam,  ** — secundum  id  quod  dictum 

conserva  justitiam,  et  Deus  prae-  est  :  '  Desiderasti  sapientiam  ? 
bebit  illam  tibi."  Serva     mandata     et     Dominus 

praestabit  tibi  eandem,'  " 

of  Seleucia ;  in  which  council  he  made  such  head  against  the  Arians  that 
to  rid  themselves  of  such  a  powerful  antagonist,  they  sent  him  back  to  France. 
The  people  received  him  as  a  hero  from  the  arena,  victorious  over  the  heretics. 
He  set  in  order  his  diocese,  and  there  passed  the  remaining  years  of  his  holy 
life.  He  died  in  367  or  368.  His  most  celebrated  work  is  his  Twelve  Books 
on  the  Trinity,  composed  during  his  exile  in  Phrygia.  This  treatise  is  a 
classic  work  on  the  Trinity.  He  has  left  also  Commentaries  on  the  Psalms 
and  Gospels,  a  treatise  De  Fide  Orientalium,  and  numerous  other  shorter 
works. 


184 


THE  CANON   OF  THE   IV.   CENTURY. 


Eccli.  XI.  30. 

"Ante  mortem  ne  laudes  ho- 
minem  quemquam,  quoniam  in 
in  filiis  suis  agnoscitur  vir." 

Dan.  XIII.  56. 

"Et,  amoto  eo,  jussit  venire 
alium,  et  dixit  ei :  Semen  Cha- 
naan,  et  non  Juda,  etc." 

EccIl  I.  16. 

"  Initium  sapientiae,  timor  Do- 
mini, etc," 

Baruch  III.  38. 

"  Post  haec  in  terns  visus  est, 
et  cum  hominibus  conversatus 
est." 

Sap.  XVII.  I. 

"  Magna  sunt  enim  judiciatua, 
Domine,  et  inenarrabilia,  etc." 

Sap.  VII.  27. 

"Et  cum  sit  una,  omnia  po- 
test :  et  in  se  permanens,  omnia 
innovat,  et  per  nationes  in  ani- 
mas  sanctas  se  transfert :  amicos 
Dei  et  prophetas  constituit." 

Sap.  I.  7. 

"  Quoniam  spiritus  Domini  re- 
plevit  orbem  terrarum,  etc." 

II.    Maccab.  VI.   18   et   seqq. 
and  VII.  I  et  seqq. 


Tract,  in  XIV.  Ps.  14. 

"  Idcirco  apud  Salomonem 
omnis  laus  in  exitu  canitur." 

Tract,  in  LII,  Ps,  19, 

"  Sed  et  Daniel  presbyteros 
condemnans  ita  dicit :  '  Non  se- 
men Abraham  sed  semen  Cha- 
naan  et  non  Juda.'  " 

Tract,  in  Ps,  LXVI.  9, 

"  Et  per  Salomonen  :  '  Initium 
sapientiae  timor  Domini  est.'  " 

Tract,  in  Ps.  LXVIII.  19. 

" — postea  in  terris  visus  sit,  et 
inter  homines  conversatus  sit." 

Tract,  in  Ps.  CXVIII.  8. 

" — et  TUTsum _prop/iefa :  'Mag- 
na enim  sunt  judicia  tua,  et  ine- 
narrabilia,' " 

Ibid,  Littera  V,  9. 

"  Si  Apostoli  docent,  prior  ille 
docuit:  'Constituit  enim  Sapien- 
tia  amicos  Dei  et  prophetas.'  " 


Ibid,  Littera  XIX.  8. 

"  Et  Spiritus  Dei,  secundum 
Prophetam,  replevit  orbem  ter- 
rarum." 

Tract,  in  Ps.  CXXV.  4. 

"  Testes  sunt  mihi  tres  pueri 
inter  flammas  cantanles  (Dan. 
III.  24  et  seqq.),  testis  Daniel  in 
fame  leonum  prophetae  prandio 
saturatus  (Dan.  XIV.  35);  testis 
Eleazar  inter  jura  dominorum 
patriis  suis  legibus  liber  ;  testes 
cum  matre  sua  martyres  septem, 
Deo  gratias  inter  nova  mortis  tor- 
menta  referentes." 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   IV.   CENTURY. 


185 


Judith  XVI.  3. 

"  Dominus  conterens  bella, 
Dominus  nomen  est  illi." 

Certainly  Hilary  denied  not 
honored  by  the  august  name  of 

Sap.  VIII.  2. 

"  Hanc  amavi,  et  exquisivi  a 
juventute  mea,  et  quaesivi  spon- 
sam  mihi  earn  assumere,  et  ama- 
tor  f actus  sum  formae  illius." 

Ibid.  3. 

"  Generositatem  illius  glorifi- 
cat  contubernium  habens  Dei  : 
sed  et  omnium  Dominus  dilexit 
illam — ." 

Ibid.  8. 

''  Et  si  multitudinem  scientiae 
desiderat  quis,  scit  praeterita.  et 
de  futuris  aestimat,  etc." 

Ibid.  2. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Tob.  XII.  12. 

"Quando  orabas  cum  lacry- 
mis,  et  sepelieb'as  mortuos,  et 
derelinquebas  prandium  tuum, 
et  mortuos  abscondebas  per  diem 
in  domo  tua,  et  nocte  sepeliebas 
cos,  ego  obtuli  orationem  tuam 
Domino." 

II.  Maccab.  VI.  21. 

"  Hi  autem,  qui  astabant,  ini- 
qua  miseratione  commoti,  prop- 
ter antiquam  viri  amicitiam,  tol- 
lentes  eum  secreto,  rogabant 
afferri  carnes,  quibus  vesci  ei 
licebat,  ut  simularetur  mandu- 
casse,  sicut  rex  imperaverat  de 
sacrificii  carnibus — ." 


Tract,  in  Ps.  CXXV.  6. 

"  — et  cantantes  ex  Lege  :  *  Do- 
minus conterens  bella,  Dominus 
nomen  est  illi.'  " 

inspiration  to  a  book  which  he 
the  "  Law." 
Tract,  in   Ps.  CX  XVIII.  9. 

"Salomon  itaque  ait  :  'Quae- 
sivi sapientiam  sponsam  adducere 
mihi  ipsi.'  " 

Ibid. 

"  —  hujus  sponsae  suae  opes 
memorat  dicens  :  '  Honestatem 
glorificat  convictum  Dei  habens, 
et  omnium  Dominus  dilexit 
eam.' " 

Ibid. 

"  — et  si  multam  quis  cogniti- 
onem  desiderat,  novit  et  quae  a 
principio  sunt,  et  quae  futura 
sunt  conspicit." 

Ibid. 

" — de  qua  et  rursum  ait :  '  Ju- 
dicavi  igitur  hanc  adducere  ad 
convivendum  mecum,  et  amator 
f actus  sum  pulchritudinis  ejus.*  " 

Tract,  in  Ps.  CXXIX.  7. 

"  Sunt,  secundum  Raphael  ad 
Tobiam  loquentem,  angeli  assis- 
tentes  ante  claritatem  Dei,  et 
orationes  deprecantium  ad  Deum 
deferentes." 


Tract,  in  Ps.  CXXXIV.  25. 

"  Sanctus  etiam  Eleazar,  cum 
a  principibus  populi  sui  degus- 
tare  ementitum  sacrificium  coge- 
retur,  gloriam  martyrii  sub  hac 
eadem  voce  consummat,  sciens, 
etc." 


186 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   IV.   CENTURY. 


Sap.  I.  7. 

"  Quoniam  spiritus  Domini  re- 
plevit  orbem  terrarum,  etc." 

Eccli.  XXVIII.  28—29. 

"  Sepi  aures  tuas  spinis,  lin- 
guam  nequam  noli  audire,  et  ori 
tuo  facito  ostia,  et  seras.  Aurum 
tuum  et  argentum  tuum  confla, 
et  verbis  tuis  facito  stateram,  et 
frenos  ori  tuo  rectos — ." 

Sap.  II.  12 — 13. 

"Circumveniamus  ergo  justum, 
quoniam  inutilis  est  nobis,  et 
contrarius  est  operibus  nostris, 
,  et  filium  Dei  se  nominat." 

Sap.  XIII  5. 

" — a  magnitudine  enim  spe- 
ciei  et  creaturae,  cognoscibiliter 
poterit  Creator  horum  videri  — ." 


Dan.  XIII.  42. 

"  Exclamavit  autem  voce  mag- 
na Susanna,  et  dixit :  Deus 
aeterne,  qui  absconditorum  es 
cognitor,  qui  nosti  omnia,  ante- 
quam  fiant  — ." 

II.  Maccab.  VII.  28. 

"  Peto,  nate,  ut  aspicias  ad  coe- 
lum  et  tcrram,  et  ad  omnia  quae 
in  eis  sunt,  et  intelligas,  quia  ex 
nihilo  fecit  ilia  Deus,  et  hominum 
genus  — ." 

II.  Maccab.  VII.  9. 

"  — et  in  ultimo  spiritu  consti- 
tutus,  sic  ait  :  Tu  quidem,  sceles- 
tissime,  in  praesenti  vita  nos  per- 
dis  :  sed  Rex  mundi  defunctos 
nos  pro  suis  legibus  in  aeternae 
vitae  resurrectione  suscitabit." 


Tract,  in  Ps.  CXXXV.  11. 

"  —  docet  propheta  dicens  : 
'  Spiritus  Dei  replevit  orbem 
terrarum.'  " 

Tract,  in  Ps.  CXL.  5. 

" — ita  monemur  :  '  Ecce  cir- 
cumvalla  possessionem  tuam  spi- 
nis ;  argentum  et  aurum  tuum 
constitue,  et  ori  tuo  fac  ostium, 
et  seram,  et  verbis  tuis  jugum  et 
mensuram.'  " 

Tract,  de  Ps.  XLI.  12. 

"  Vox  cataractae  fuit  :  '  Op- 
primamus  justum,  quia  inutilis  est 
nobis,  et  contrarius  est  operibus 
nostris,  et  filium  Dei  se  nomi- 
nat.' " 

De  Trinitate  Lib.  I.  7. 

" —  hunc  de  Deo  pulcherrimae 
sententiae  modum  propheticis 
vocibus  apprehendit :  '  De  mag- 
nitudine enim  operum  et  pulchri- 
tudine  creaturarum  consequenter 
generationum  Conditor  conspici- 
tur.'" 

Ibid.  Lib.  IV.  8. 

"  —  sicut  beata  Susanna  dicit : 
'  Deus  aeterne,  absconditorum 
cognitor,  sciens  omnia  ante  gene- 
rationem  eorum.'  " 

Ibid.  16. 

"Omnia  enim  secundum  Pro- 
phetam  facta  ex  nihilo  sunt." 


Lib.  Contra  Const.  Imp.  6. 

"  —  sciat  a  martyre  esse  dic- 
tum regi  Antiocho  :  '  Tu  quidem, 
iniquus,  de  presenti  vita  nos  per- 
dis,  sed  Rex  mundi  defunctos  nos 
pro  suis  legibus  in  aeternam  vi- 
tam  in  resurrectione  suscitabit.'  " 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   IV.   CENTURY.  187 

Ex  Operibus  Historicis  Frag. 
Eccli.  XXI.  I.  HI.  24. 

'* Fill,  peccasti  ?    non  adjicias  "Nee    Dominum   audiunt   di- 

iterum  :  sed  etde  pristinis  depre-      centem  :  *  Peccasti  ?  quiesce.'  " 
care,  ut  tibi  dimittentur." 

Sap.  II.  23.  Epistola  VIII. 

"  Quoniam  Deus  creavit  homi-  "Salomon  clamat  dicens :  'Deus 

nem  inexterminabilem,  etc."  condidit  hominem  ad  immortali- 

tatem.'" 

Sap.  VI.  8.  Ibid.  IX. 

"  Non   enim   subtrahet  perso-  "  Clamat  Propheta  dicens  :  'Et 

nam  cujusquam  Deus,  nee  vere-      pauperem  et  divitem  ego  feci,  et 
bitur  magnitudinem  cujusquam  ;      pro   omnibus   aequalis   cura   est 
quoniam    pusillum    et  magnum      mihi.'" 
ipse  fecit,  et  aeqaliter  cura  est  illi 
de  omnibus." 

Hilary  has  here  explicitly  canonized  every  deuterocanonical 
hook.  He  sought  the  mystic  number  in  the  books  that  the 
Hebrews  received,  not  with  the  view  to  exclude  the  others 
from  divine  inspiration,  but  only  classifying  the  Scriptures  of 
the  Old  Testament  in  two  general  categories,  which  existed 
down  to  the  time  of  the  Council  of  Trent. 

The  next  objection  which  is  urged  against  us  is  taken  from 
the  fragmentary  writings  of  Rufinus.*  The  objection  is  taken 
from  the  Commentarius  in  Symbolum  Apostolorum  36 — 38. 
"  And  therefore  it  seems  apposite  to  clearly  enumerate,  as  we 
have  received  from  the  testimonies  of  the  Fathers,  the  books 
of   the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  which,  according   to   the 

*Rufinus  was  born  at  Concordia,  a  small  village  of  Italy,  towards  the 
middle  of  the  4th  century.  He  early  devoted  himself  to  the  acquisition  of 
knowledge,  for  which  cause  he  took  up  his  abode  at  Aquileja,  whose  renown 
as  a  seat  of  learning  had  merited  for  it  the  name  of  the  second  Rome.  A  de- 
sire for  sanctity  drew  him  into  a  monastery  in  this  city,  wherein  St.  Jerome  first 
met  him.  There  was  formed  between  Jerome  and  Rufinus  the  closest  friend- 
ship, so  that  when  Jerome  left  Aquileja  to  journey  through  France  and  Ger- 
many, Rufinus,  unconsolable  by  the  separation,  went  in  search  of  him. 

Rufinus  visited  Egypt,  and  there  formed  a  lasting  friendship  with  the 
celebrated  St.  Melania.  He  suffered  many  persecutions  from  the  Arians. 
He  was  sent  into  exile,  from  which  Melania  ransomed  him,  and  both  retired 
to  Palestine. 

The  esteem  in  which  Jerome  at  this  time  held  Rufinus  may  be  known 
from  the  following,  written  to  a  friend  in  Jerusalem  :  "  You  will  see  shine 
in  Rufinus  the  character  of  sanctity,  while  I  am  but  dust.  My  feeble  eyes 
can  scarce  bear  the  effulgence  of  his  virtues.  He  comes  even  now  from  the 
cleansing  crucible  of  persecution,  and  is  now  whiter  than  snow,  while  I  am 
stained  by  all  sorts  of  sins." 

Rufinus  built  a  monastery  on  Mt.  Olivet,  and  there  labored  zealously 


188         THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 

tradition  of  the  ancients,  are  believed  to  be  inspired  by  the 
Holy  Ghost,  and  delivered  to  the  Church."  Then  follows  a 
list  of  only  the  protocanonical  works.  Continuing,  he  says  : 
"It  is  to  be  known,  however,  that  there  are  other  books  which 
have  been  called  by  the  Fathers  not  canonical  but  ecclesiasti- 
cal. Such  are  the  Wisdom  which  is  called  of  Salomon,  and  the 
other  Wisdom  which  is  called  of  the  Son  of  Sirach,  which  book 
in  the  Latin  tongue  is  called  by  the  general  term  of  Ecclesias- 
ticus,  by  which  term  not  the  author  but  the  quality  of  the 
Scripture  is  designated.  Of  the  same  order  are  the  books  of 
Tobias  and  Judith  and  the  books  of  Maccabees,  and  in  the 
New  Testament  the  book  which  is  called  the  Pastor  of  Her- 
mas,  and  the  Two  Ways  or  Choice  of  Peter.  All  these  books, 
they  (the  Fathers)  wished  to  be  read  in  the  churches,  but  not 
to  be  used  for  the  confirmation  of  dogma." 

The  testimony  of  Rufinus  well  illustrates  the  position  of  the 
deuterocanonical  books  in  that  age.  The  Church,  as  the  divine 
institution  of  Christ,  used  them,  and  the  faithful  drew  their  spirit- 
ual teaching  from  them.  At  the  same  time,  some  of  the  Fathers 
induced  a  scientific  distinction  between  them  and  the  books  of 
the  first  canon.  This  scientific  distinction  was  purely  a  critical 
judgment  of  the  Fathers,  and  was  not  aimed  at  denying  to 
these  books  divine  inspiration.  There  had  been  no  decree  of 
the  Church,  and  these  books  had  not  as  much  extrinsically  in 
their  favor  as  the  others.  The  extremely  conservative  spirit 
of  the  Fathers  was  content  to  use  them  as  divine  Scripture  in 
their  practical  use  of  Scripture  ;  while,  in  drawing  up  official 
lists  of  Scriptures,  they  hestitated  to  make  them  equal  with  the 
books  which  the  Church  had  received  from   the  Synagogue. 

and  fruitfully  in  apostolic  work.  Having  become  conversant  with  Greek 
while  in  Alexandria,  he  translated  into  Latin  various  works  of  the  Greek 
tongue.  Among  others,  he  translated  the  Principles  of  Origen.  This  led  to 
a  rupture  with  St.  Jerome,  and  there  is  nothing  so  bitter  in  patristic  literature 
as  Jerome's  subsequent  invective  against  Ruflnus.  This  division  was  a  cause 
of  much  scandal  in  the  Church.  That  Ruflnus  led  a  saintly  life,  can  not  be 
doubted,  but  it  seems  quite  certain  that  he  became  in  his  later  years  infected 
with  the  errors  of  Origen.  Refinus  declared  that  he  had  acted  as  a  mere 
translator  of  the  works  of  Origen,  and  Pope  Anastasius,  before  whom  he  was 
cited,  declared  that  he  would  leave  to  God  to  judge  of  his  intention.  We 
must  do  the  same,  but  in  justification  to  St.  Jerome,  it  must  be  said  that  his 
zeal  for  orthodoxy  caused  him  to  repudiate  the  man  whom  he  had  once  called 
friend. 

The  most  important  of  Ruflnus'  works  are  :  De  Benedictionibus  Patri- 
archarum,  Commentarius  in  Symbolum  Apostolorum,  Historia  Monachorum, 
Historia  Ecclesiastica,  Apologia  contra  Hieronymum  and  an  Apologia  ad 
Anastasium  Papam.     He  died  in  Sicily  in  410. 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   IV.   CENTURY. 


180 


In  the  growth  and  development  of  doctrine,  this  hesitancy  has 
been  excluded  by  the  vital  power  in  the  Church.  In  the  few 
writings  of  Rufinus  which  remain  to  us,  we  find  the  following 
quotations  of  deuterocanonical  Scripture  : 

Benedictio  Gad  3. 


Eccli.  XXXIV.  9. 

"  Qui  non  est  tentatus,  quid 
scit?  Vir  in  multis  expertus,  co- 
gitabit  multa  ;  at  qui  multa  didi- 
cit,  enarrabit  intellectum," 

Eccli.  XI.  30. 

"  Ante  mortem  ne  laudes  ho- 
minem  quemquam,  quoniam  in 
filiis  suis  agnoscitur  vir." 

Baruch  III.  36—38. 

"  Hie  est  Deus  noster,  et  non 
aestimabitur  alius  adversus  eum. 
Hie  adinvenit  omnem  viam  dis- 
ciplinae,  et  tradidit  illam  Jacob 
puero  sue,  et  Israel  dilecto  suo. 
Post  haec  in  terris  visus  est,  et 
cum  hominibus  conversatus  est." 


"  —  ita  enim  Scriptura  dicit : 
*  Qui  non  est  tentatus,  non  est 
probabilis.* " 

Benedictio  Joseph  3. 

"  —  sed  et  sanctae  Scripturae 
sententia  est:  '  Ne  laudaveris 
quemquam  ante  obitum.'  " 

Comment,  in  Symbolum  Apost. 
5- 

"  Quod  et  Propheta  praedixe- 
rat  ubi  ait :  '  Hie  Deus  noster, 
non  reputabitur  alter  ad  eum. 
Invenit  omnem  viam  disciplinae, 
et  dedit  eam  Jacob  puero  suo  et 
Israel  dilecto  suo  :  post  haec  in 
terris  visus  est  et  inter  homines 
conversatus  est.'  " 


Sap.  III.  7- 

"  Fulgebunt  justi,  et  tamquam 
scintillae  in  arundineto  discur- 
rent." 


Ibid.  46. 

" — non  erit  difficile  credere 
etiam  ilia  quae  Prophetae  prae- 
dlxerant :  'Quod  justi  scilicet 
fulgebunt  sicut  sol,  et  sicut  splen- 
dor firmamenti  in  regno  Dei." 

Certainly  the  man  who  quoted  these  lines  believed  that  he 
was  employing  Holy  Scripture. 

In  his  Apologia  Contra  Hieronynum,  Lib.  II.  from  the  32d 
to  the  37th  paragraph,  Rufinus  bitterly  inveighs  against  St. 
Jerome  for  having  dared  to  cut  ofif  the  deuterocanonical  books.* 

*An  ut  divinarum  Scripturarum  libros,  quos  ad  plenissimum  fldei  Instni- 
mentum  Ecclesiis  Christi  Apostoli  tradiderunt,  nova  nunc  et  a  Judaeis  mutata 

interpretatione  mutares  ? Quis  prsesumserit  sacras  Sancti  Spiritus  voces  et 

divina  Volumina  temerare  ?  Quis  praeter  te  divino  muneri  et  Apostolorum 
haereditati  manus  intulerit. 

Et  quidem  cum  in  gens  copia  fuisse  ex  initio  in  Ecclesiis  Dei,  et  praecipue 
Jerosolymis  eorum,  qui  ex  circumcisione  crediderant,  referatur,  in  quibus 
utique  linguae  utriusque  perfectam  fuisse  scientiam,  et  legis  peritiam  proba- 
bilem,  administrati  pontiflcatus  testatur  offlcium.      Quis  ergo  in  ista  eru- 


190  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 

Hence  in  justice  and  right,  Rufinus  must  be  considered 
in  every  way  favorable  to  the  deuterocanonical  works. 
We  now  come  to  the  Achilles  of  our  adversaries,  St. 
Jerome,  a  man  more  versed  in  the  Scriptures  than  any  other  of 
the  Fathers  up  to  his  day.  He  has  in  many  places,  in  no 
dubious  terms,  expressed  his  opposition  to  the  deuterocanoni- 
cal books.  As  Jerome  is  inseparably  linked  with  the  Latin 
Vulgate,  we  deem  it  not  amiss  to  insert  here  an  abstract  of  his 
life.  He  was  born  about  the  year  346  in  Stridon,  a  small 
village  on  the  confines  of  Pannonia  and  Dalmatia. 

His  parents  were  property  holders,  and  afforded  Jerome  a 
liberal  education.  Though  born  of  Catholic  parents,  he  was 
not  baptized  in  his  infancy.  Infant  baptism  was  not  then  the 
custom.  After  finishing  his  juvenile  studies  at  home,  he  was 
sent  to  Rome,  and  studied  rhetoric  under  Aelius  Donatus. 
Jerome's  youth  could  not  have  been  exempt  from  error,  for  he 
confesses  in  his  VH.  Epistle:  "Ye  know  the  difficult  way  of 
adolescence  in  which  I  also  stumbled."  And  in  his  XLVHI. 
Epistle,  20  :  "I  extol  to  the  heavens,  virginity,  not  that  I  pos- 
sess it,  but  that  I  admire  that  which  I  do  not  possess."  He  was 
accustomed,  with  other  young  men  of  like  age  and  mind  with 
himself,  to  visit  the  Catacombs.  Such  mode  of  life  manifested 
a  serious  bent,  and  he  was  finally  baptized  in  the  Catholic  faith, 
when  about  twenty  years  of  age.  After  completing  his  studies 
in  Rome,  he  travelled  through  Gaul,  seeking  knowledge  from 

ditorum  virorum  copia  ausus  est  Instrumentum  divinum,  quod  Apostoli 
Ecclesiis  tradidenint,  et  depositum  Sancti  Spiritus  compilare  ?  An  non  est 
compilare  cum  quaedam  quidem  immutantur,  et  error  dicitur  corrigi  ?  Nam 
omnis  ilia  historia  de  Susanna,  quae  castitatis  exemplum  praebebat  Ecclesiis 
Dei,  ab  isto  abscissa  est  et  abjecta  atque  posthabita.  Trium  puerorum 
hymnus,  qui  maxime  diebus  solemnibus  in  Ecclesia  Dei  canitur,  ab  isto  e  loco 
suo  penitus  erasus  est.  Et  quid  per  singula  commemoro  de  his,  quorum  com- 
prehendere  numerum  nequeo  ?  De  quo  ut  omittam  illud  dicere,  quod  Sep- 
tuaginta  duorum  virorum  per  cellulas  interpretantium  unam  et  consonam 
vocem,  dubitandum  non  est,  Spiritus  Sancti  inspiratione  prolatam,  et  ma j  oris 
id  debere  esse  auctoritatis,  quam  id  quod  ab  uno  homine,  sibi  Barraba  aspir- 
ante,  translatum  est.  Ut  ergo  hoc  omittam,  vide  quid  dicimus,  verbi  caussa. 
Petrus  Romanae  Ecclesiae  per  viginti  et  quatuor  annos  praefuit :  dubitandum 
non  est,  quin  sicut  caetera,  quae  ad  instructionem  pertinent,  etiam  librorum 
Instrumenta  Ecclesiae  ipse  tradiderit,  quae  utique  jam  tunc,  ipso  sedente  et 
docente,  recitabantur  ?  Quid  ergo  ?  Decepit  Petrus  Apostolus  Christi 
Ecclesiam,  etlibros  ei  falsos  et  nihil  veritatis  continentes  tradidit,  et  cum 
sciret,  quod  verum  est  haberi  apud  Judaeos,  apud  Christianos  volebat  haberi 
quod  falsum  est  ?  Sed  fortasse  dicit,  quia  sine  Uteris  erat  Petrus,  et  sciebat 
quidem  Judaeorum  libros  magis  esse  veros,  quam  istos,  qui  erant  in 
Ecclesia :  sed  interpretari  non  poterat  propter  sermonis  imperitiam  ?  Et 
quid  ?  Nihil  in  isto  agebat  ignea  lingua  per  Spiritum  Sanctum  caelitusdata? 
Non  ergo  omnibus  Unguis  loquebantur  Apostoli  ? 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY.  191 

learned  men  and  from  the  libraries.  He  settled  some  time  at 
Treves,  where  the  first  promptings  to  the  higher  life  were  recog- 
nized by  him.  Having  determined  to  leave  the  world,  and 
consecrate  himself  to  God,  he  returned  to  his  home  and  ad- 
justed his  patrimony.  Thence  he  travelled  through  Greece, 
Thrace,  Asia  Minor,  into  Syria,  and  coming  to  Antioch,  re- 
sided there  for  some  time,  where  he  heard  ApoUinaris  explain 
the  Scriptures,  but  favored  not  his  heretical  dogma.  Jerome 
now  determined  to  seek  solitude,  and  there  devote  his  life  to 
Scriptural  studies.  For  this  reason,  he  sought  the  desert  of 
Chalcis,  which  was  on  the  confines  of  Syria,  bordering  on  the 
land  of  the  Saracens.  He  was  now  about  28  years  old.  The 
desert  of  Chalcis  was  peopled  by  a  sort  of  community  of  hermits, 
who  lived  under  the  guidance  of  Marcus  the  presbyter. 
Jerome  speaks  pathetically  of  his  struggles  to  overcome  his 
passions  while  in  this  solitude.  In  his  letter  to  Eustochium, 
Ep.  XXn.  7:  "  O,  in  my  solitude  and  in  that  vast  desert,  which, 
burnt  by  the  sun's  heat,  afforded  a  wild  habitation  to  the  monks, 
how  oft  I  imagined  myself  in  the  midst  of  the  luxuries  of  Rome  ! 
I  sat  alone,  because  I  was  filled  with  bitterness.  My  uncomely 
limbs  were  rough  with  sackcloth,  and  my  squalid  skin  became 
as  black  as  an  Ethiopian's.  Tears  every  day,  groans  every  day- 
and  if  ever  the  sleep  which  hung  on  my  eye-lids  overcame  my 
resistance,  I  knocked  against  the  ground  my  bare  bones,  which 
scarce  hung  together.     I  say  nought  of  food  and  drink,  since 

— quomodo  non  pervidebant  per  spiritum,  quod  futurum  esset  tempus 
post  quadringentos  fere  annos,  quando  Ecclesia,  cognito  eo  quod  ab  Apostolis 
non  sibi  esset  tradita  Veritas  veteris  Instrument!,  legatos  mitteret  ad  istos, 
quos  illi  tunc  Circumcisionem  vocabant,  obsecrans  et  exorans,  ut  sibi  de  veri- 
tate,  quae  apud  ipsos  est,  aliquid  largirentur  ?  Per  totos  istos  quadringentos 
annos  errasse  se,  et  ignorasse  quod  verum  est,  fateretur  ?  Adscitam  se 
quidem  esse  ex  Gentibus  sponsam  Christo  per  Apostolos  :  sed  non  ab  eis  veris 
monilibus  exornatam  :  putasse  se  lapides  esse  pretiosos,  nunc  autem  depre- 
hendisse,  quod  non  sunt  verae  istae  gemmae,  quas  sibi  Apostoli  Christi  im- 
posuerant :  erubescere  se  ad  publicum  procedere,  falsis  et  non  veris  lapidi- 
bus  adornatam,  et  ideo  rogare  se,  ut  vel  Barrabam  ilium  quem  aliquando,  ut 
Christo  nuberet,  spreverat,  mittant  ad  se  qui  possit  cum  uno  electo  ex  suis 
viro  ornamenta  sibi  vera,  quae  Apostoli  non  praestiterant,  reparare  ?. . . . 

Tua  verba  sunt,  post  quadringentos  annos  non  debere  simplices  Latin- 
orum  aures  novae  doctrinae  voce  pulsari.  Modo  tu  dicis  :  Omnis  qui  puta- 
bat  Susannam  nuptis  et  innuptis  exemplum  pudicitiae  praestitisse,  erravit. 
Non  est  verum.  Et  omnis  qui  putabat,  quod  puer  Daniel  Spiritu  Sancto 
fuerit  repletus,  et  arguerit  adulteros  senes,  erravit :  non  erat  verum.  Et 
omnis  Ecclesia  per  orbem  terrarum,  sive  eorum  qui  in  corpore  sunt,  sive 
eorum  qui  ad  Dominum  perrexerunt,  sive  illi  sancti  Confessores  fuerunt,  seu 
etiam  sancti  Martyres,  quicumque  Hymnum  trium  puerorum  in  Ecclesia  Do- 
mini cecinerunt,  omnes  erraverunt,  et  falsa  cecinerunt.  Modo  ergo  nobis  post 
quadringentos  annos  Legis  Veritas  empta  pretio  de  Synagoga  procedit 


192         THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 

the  monks,  even  when  ill,  use  only  cold  water,  and  it  is  thought 
a  sin  of  luxury  to  take  anything  cooked.  And  I,  who  through 
fear  of  hell  had  condemned  myself  to  such  a  prison,  and  be- 
came the  companion  of  scorpions  and  wild  beasts,  oft  seemed 
to  be  in  the  dances  of  maidens.  My  face  was  pale  from  fast- 
ings, but  my  mind  was  tempestuous  with  lustful  desires  ;  in 
my  cold  body,  the  sole  incentive  of  lust  heated  the  man,  dead 
before  his  death,  within  his  own  yet  living  flesh ....  I  remem- 
ber in  my  wailings  to  have  often  passed  the  day  as  well  as  the 
night,  and  not  to  have  ceased  from  beating  my  breast  till,  the 
Lord  intervening,  peace  came.  I  feared  my  cell  as  though  it 
were  conscious  of  my  thoughts.  Angry  and  unmerciful  towards 
myself,  I  wandered  alone  through  the  deserts.  If  ever  I  saw 
the  hollow  of  a  valley,  or  the  rough  peak  of  a  mountain,  or  an 
abrupt  rock,  there  was  the  place  of  my  prayer,  there  the  prison 
of  my  miserable  flesh,  and,  the  Lord  is  my  witness,  after  many 
tears,  after  much  fixing  of  my  eyes  in  heaven,  sometimes  I 
seemed  to  be  among  the  cohorts  of  angels,  and  happy  and  re- 
joicing, I  sang:  '  We  shall  run  after  thee  to  the  odour  of  thy 
ointments.'" 

To  divert  his  mind  from  lustful  thoughts,  he  took  up  the 
study  of  Hebrew,  as  he  tells  us  in  his  letter  to  Rusticus,  Epist. 
125,  12:  "  When  I  was  young,  and  the  solitude  of  the  desert  en- 
compassed me,  I  could  not  endure  the  incentives  of  vice  and  the 
ardor  of  my  nature,  which,  although  I  had  broken  by  frequent 
fastings,  my  mind  surged  with  (lustful)  thoughts.  To  overcome 
this,  I  gave  myself  into  the  tutelage  of  a  certain  one  of  the 
Hebrews  who  had  believed,  in  order  that,  after  the  rhetorical 
niceties  of  Quintillian,  the  rivers  of  Cicero,  the  gravity  of 
Fronto,  and  soft  grace  of  Pliny,  I  might  learn  a  (mere)  alpha- 
bet, and,  ponder  on  harsh  and  grating  words.  What  labor  I 
endured,  what  difficulty  I  underwent,  how  oft  I  despaired, 
how  oft  I  ceased,  and,  through  the  desire  of  knowledge,  again 
began ;  my  conscience  bears  witness ;  and  not  only  the  con- 
science of  me  who  suffered  ,  but  also  of  those  who  lived  with 
me.  And  I  thank  God  that,  from  this  bitter  seed  of  my 
studies,  I  now  gather  sweet  fruits." 

The  sweet  fruits  were  the  deeper  insight  into  God's  prepara- 
tory dispensation  in  the  Old  Law,  which  only  those  who 
know  the  Hebrew  tongue  can  attain.  Some  have  thought 
that  Jerome  learned  Greek  also  in  this  hermitage,  but  it 
seems  more  probable  that  he  acquired  that  tongue  in  the 
curriculum  of  his  studies  at  Rome.  He  could  not  have 
listened    to    the    lectures    of    ApoUinaris  at    Antioch,  unless 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   IV.   CENTURY.  193 

he  knew  Greek,  his  language.  Jerome's  impulsive  char- 
acter made  him  many  enemies.  A  dissension  arose  about 
the  succession  to  the  See  of  Antioch,  Jerome  was  drawn 
into  it,  and  his  relations  became  so  strained  with  the  monks, 
that  in  the  spring  of  379  he  left  his  solitude,  and  returned  to 
Antioch.  While  in  the  solitude,  he  had  a  vision  in  which  he 
seemed  to  stand  before  the  throne  of  God,  and  be  condemned 
that  he  was  not  a  Christian  but  a  Ciceronian.  This  event  tem- 
pered his  love  for  the  profane  classics,  and  inclined  him  ever 
more  to  the  Scriptures. 

The  party  of  the  orthodox  but  unwise  Paulinus  had 
triumphed  at  Antioch,  and,  as  Jerome  had  favored  his 
cause,  he  found  welcome  in  that  city.  He  was  by  the  said 
Paulinus  ordained  priest.  In  380  he  went  to  Constantinople 
and  studied  Scripture  under  Gregory  Nazianzen.  In  382 
Jerome,  Paulinus  of  Antioch,  and  St.  Epiphanius  were  sum- 
moned to  Rome  by  Pope  Damasus  to  take  part  in  the  Roman 
Synod  held  in  that  year.  After  the  close  of  the  Synod,  Jerome 
remained  at  Rome  in  the  capacity  of  oriental  secretary  to 
Damasus.  At  this  time  he  undertook,  at  the  command  of 
Damasus,  a  revision  of  the  Psalter,  which  continued  in  use  in 
the  Church  down  to  the  times  of  Pius  V.  He  next  extended 
his  labors  to  revising  the  New  Testament,  which  he  "  restored 
according  to  the  original  Greek."  Jerome's  relations  with 
Damasus  were  very  close.  Most  of  Jerome's  Scriptural  work 
at  this  time  was  done  at  Damasus  request.  The  vehemence 
and  intolerance  of  Jerome's  nature,  can  be  gleaned  from  the 
following  passage,  Epist.  XXXIII.  4.  It  was  written  concern- 
ing the  condemnation  of  Origen  :  "  Rome  consents  to  his 
condemnation  ;  it  brings  together  its  senate  against  him,  not 
because  of  the  novelty  of  his  doctrines,  not  because  of  heresy, 
as  the  dogs  who  are  mad  against  him  now  pretend  ;  but  because 
they  could  not  bear  the  glory  of  his  eloquence  and  his  know- 
ledge, and  because  when  he  spoke  they  were  made  to  appear 
as  mutes."* 

A  few  years  later,  he  abused  Rufinus  in  a  similar  manner 
because  he  sustained  the  defense  of  Origen.  Like  violent 
changes  of  opinion  characterize  his  whole  life.  His  judgments 
are  not  uniform  and  consistent,  and  this  is  to  be  taken  into 
account  when  adducing  him  as  an  authority. 

Jerome  had  made  enemies  among  the  clergy  of  Rome. 
Rome  was  in  a  state  of  moral  and  political  decline,  and 
Jerome  longed  for  the  quiet  of  the  desert. 

*Jerome  was  accustomed  to  call  the  clergy  of  Rome  the  Senate  of  Pharisees. 
M 


194         THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 

Paulinus  and  Jerome  were  the  guests  at  Rome  of  the 
noble  and  wealthy  lady  Paula,  the  heiress  of  the  Aemil- 
ian  race.  She  had  three  daughters,  Blesilla  who  died  in  a 
youthful  widowhood,  Eustochium,  who  took  the  virgin's  vow, 
and  Paulina  who  married  Pammachius,  the  friend  of  Jerome. 
With  these  and  certain  other  noble  ladies,  Jerome  formed  a  sort 
of  circle.  They  withdrew  from  the  corrupt  social  and  political 
life,  and  devoted  their  time  to  meditation,  works  of  charity, 
and  the  study  of  the  Scriptures,  which  Jerome  expounded. 
When  Damasus  died,  Jerome  found  that  it  would  be  uncon- 
genial to  live  in  Rome.  Siricius,  the  successor  of  Damasus 
had  no  sympathy  with  him,  and  the  clergy  were  almost  all 
opposed  to  him.  In  384  he  set  out  from  Rome  and  journeyed 
through  Cyprus  into  Syria,  and  remained  some  time  at 
Antioch.  Thence  he  journeyed  in  company  with  Paula  and 
Eustochium  down  through  Palestine,  visiting  the  places  made 
memorable  by  the  life  of  Our  Lord. 

In  Praef.  2  ad  Paralip.  he  describes  the  finis  of  this 
journey :  "  As  those  who  have  seen  Athens  better  under- 
stand Grecian  history;  and  as  he,  who  has  traveled  from 
Troas  through  Leucadia  and  the  Acroceraunian  mountains 
to  Sicily,  and  thence  to  the  mouth  of  the  Tiber,  will  better 
understand  the  third  book  of  Virgil,  thus  a  man  will  more 
clearly  understand  the  Scriptures,  if  he  shall  have  seen 
Judea  with  his  own  eyes,  and  shall  have  examined  the 
memorials  of  the  old  cities,  and  the  names  of  places 
whether  unchanged  or  changed.  Hence  we  took  the  pains  to 
undergo  this  labor  with  most  learned  Hebrews,  that  we  might 
journey  through  the  country  of  which  all  the  churches  of 
Christ  speak.  Coming  to  Caesarea,  Jerome  came  upon  the 
Hexapla  of  Origen,  and  from  this  copied  all  the  books  of  the 
Old  Testament.  He  descended  into  Egypt  and  listened  at 
Alexandria  to  Didymus,  the  celebrated  teacher  of  Scripture : 
**  My  head  was  now  sprinkled  with  gray  hairs,"  he  says,  "  and 
seemed  more  fit  for  the  master  than  the  disciple ;  but  I  went 
to  Alexandria,  I  heard  Didymus,  and,  for  many  things,  am 
thankful  to  him." 

From  Alexandria  Jerome  went  to  Bethlehem,  where 
he  spent  his  remaining  years  in  an  ascetical  life.  A  mon- 
astery was  built  of  which  Jerome  was  head,  and  a  convent, 
over  which  Paula  presided.  Both  the  patrimony  of  Paula 
and  Jerome  were  expended  in  this  work.  Jerome  lived  in  a 
cell  close  to  the  monastery,  and  it  is  in  this  period  of  his  life 
that  his  greatest  works  were  executed.     He  exercised  a  general 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY.         195 

supervision  over  the  monks  and  was  sought  by  learned  men 
from  all  parts  of  the  world.  Sulpicius  Severus,  who  spent  six 
months  with  him  at  Bethlehem,  thus  describes  his  life:  "  He 
is  wholly  absorbed  in  reading,  he  takes  no  rest  by  day  or  by 
night ;  he  is  ever  reading  or  writing  something."  Jerome  was 
a  man  of  great  physical  endurance.  His  literary  activity  at 
Bethlehem  may  be  compared  to  that  of  Origen.  He  trans- 
lated the  book  of  Tobias  in  a  single  night,  and  even,  when  ill, 
he  dictated  from  his  couch  to  an  amanuensis. 

To  perfect  his  knowledge  of  Hebrew,  he  employed  a  Jew 
to  teach  him,  and,  as  this  preceptor  feared  the  fanaticism  of  his 
race,  the  lessons  were  given  by  night.  Jerome  speaks  of  these 
things  in  his  Epist.  ad  Pammachius,  84,  3  :  "  With  most  great 
labor,  and  great  price  did  I  have  Baranina  by  night  as  precep- 
tor. He  feared  the  Jews,  and  was  to  me  another  Nicodemus." 
Coupled  with  this,  he  assiduously  studied  the  Fathers  and 
writers  of  the  Church.  Villarsi  declares,  that  no  one,  Greek  or 
Latin,  read  more  authors  than  Jerome.  In  the  year  389  Jerome 
began  the  great  work  of  his  life,  a  translation  of  the  proto- 
canonical  books  of  the  Old  Testament  from  the  original 
Hebrew.  He  was  not  able  to  devote  all  his  time  to  the  great 
work,  but  it  was  the  chief  object  of  his  labors  for  fifteen  years. 
He  also  translated  the  deuterocanonical  books  of  Tobias  and 
Judith  from  Chaldean  exemplars.  This  translation  of  Jerome 
forms  our  Vulgate,  concerning  which  we  shall  speak  later. 
His  translation  of  the  Psalter  from  the  Hebrew  was  not  re- 
ceived into  the  Vulgate ;  its  place  was  occupied  by  the  Psalter 
which  he  revised  from  the  Hexaplar  text  of  Origen  at  Caesarea. 
Jerome  died  at  Bethlehem,  according  to  the  Chronicle  of  Pros- 
per, in  the  year  420,  and  was  interred  close  to  the  Grotto  of  the 
Nativity  of  Our  Saviour.  His  body  was  afterwards  brought 
to  the  Church  of  St.  Maria  Maggiore  in  Rome.  Jerome  is 
rightly  considered  as  one  of  the  greatest  of  the  Fathers.  His 
character  was  not  without  defects.  He  was  scornful  and 
resentful  in  controversy,  and  somewhat  sensitive  as  to  the 
estimation  in  which  he  was  held  by  his  contemporaries.  But 
he  was  without  avarice,  great  of  heart,  diligent  in  work  and 
nobly  tenacious  of  the  main  objects  to  which  he  devoted  his  life. 

He  was  a  man  of  iron  will,  when  he  saw  principle  and  duty 
before  him,  a  strong  man,  whom  no  motives  could  divert 
from  what  he  deemed  just  and  right.  The  saddest  event  of 
his  whole  life  was  his  violent  quarrel  with  Rufinus,  whom  he 
vituperated  even  after  his  death.  Rufinus  died  in  Sicily  in 
410,  and  Jerome  thus  speaks  of   his  death   in   the  opening 


196  THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 

chapter  of  his  Commentary  on  Ezechiel:  ''The  scorpion  Hes 
underground  between  Enceladus  and  Porphyrion,  and  the 
hydra  of  many  heads  has  at  last  ceased  to  hiss  against  me." 
"  Tantaene  animis  coelestibus  irae  ?  " 

Jerome's  attitude  towards  the  deuterocanonical  books  was 
not  consistent.  At  times  he  bitterly  attacks  them,  as  in  the 
following  passages. 

In  his  celebrated  Prologus  Galeatus,  after  the  enumeration 
of  the  protocanonical  books,  he  continues  :  "  Whatever  is  out- 
side of  these  is  to  be  placed  among  the  Apocrypha.  Therefore 
the  Wisdom  which  is  commonly  ascribed  to  Solomon,  and  the 
book  of  Jesus  the  son  of  Sirach,  Judith,  Tobias,  and  Pastor  are 
not  in  the  Canon.  The  first  Book  of  Maccabees  I  found  in 
Hebrew,  the  second  is  originally  Greek,  as  appears  from  the 
diction." 

Again  in  the  Preface  to  Ezra :  "  What  is  not  received 
by  them,  (the  Hebrews)  and  what  is  not  of  the  twenty-four 
Ancients  (the  protocanonical  books)  is  to  be  repulsed  far  from 
one. 

In  his  Preface  to  the  Books  of  Solomon :  "  There  exist 
also  Panaretus,  the  book  of  Jesus  the  Son  of  Sirach,  and  another 
of  the  pseudepigrapha  which  is  called  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon. 
The  first,  I  found  in  Hebrew,  not  called  Ecclesiasticus,  as  with 
the  Latins,  but  Parables:  the  second  is  nowhere  with  the  Hebrews 
and  the  very  style  savors  of  Greek  eloquence,  and  some  of  the 
old  writers  have  ascribed  it  to  Philo  the  Jew.  As,  therefore, 
the  Church  reads  Judith,  Tobias,  and  the  books  of  Maccabees, 
but  does  not  hold  them  canonical,  thus  let  her  read  these  two 
volumes  for  the  edification  of  the  people,  not  for  the  confir- 
mation of  Ecclesiastical  dogmas." 

In  his  Praef.  in  Esther :  "  To  this  book  the  received  Latin 
version  has  added  various  ragged  patches  of  words,  adding 
the  things  which  might  be  suggested  by  the  theme."  Here  is 
an  evident  condemnation  of  the  deuterocanonical  fragments  of 
Esther. 

Writing  to  Laeta,  Epist.  107,  12,  on  the  mode  of  instruct- 
ing her  daughter,  he  says :  "  Let  her  shun  all  Apocrypha  (the 
deuterocanonical  books),  and  if  ever  she  should  read  them,  not 
for  confirmation  of  dogmas,  but  out  of  reverence  for  the  words, 
let  her  know  that  they  are  not  of  those  who  appear  in  the 
titles,  and  that  there  are  many  false  things  intermingled  in  them, 
and  that  one  has  need  of  great  prudence  to  seek  the  gold  in  the 
slime."  In  his  Commentary  on  Daniel,  although  he  comments 
the  deuterocanonical  fragments,  he  is  inclined  to  think  that 


THE   CANON    OF  THE   IV.   CENTURY.  197 

they  are  fables  of  Greek  origin.  It  does  not  increase  our 
esteem  of  Jerome's  critique  to  find  that  one  cause  of  his  doubt 
of  the  fragments  is  that  in  the  XIV.  Chapter,  first  verse,  the 
King  of  Babylon  is  said  to  cry  out  with  a  loud  voice;  whereas 
Jerome  had  maintained  that  only  the  saints  are  said  in  Scrip- 
ture to  cry  out  with  a  loud  voice. 

In  his  prologue  to  Daniel,  he  justifies  himself  for  having 
fixed  an  obelus  to  the  fragments  of  Daniel,  alleging  that 
"  Origen,  and  Eusebius,  and  Apollinaris  and  other  church- 
writers  and  doctors  of  Greece  declare  that  these  visions  have 
no  place  with  the  Hebrews,  and  that  they  needed  not  to 
respond  to  Porphyrins  in  defense  of  those  things  to  which  the 
Holy  Scriptures  gave  no  authority." 

In  his  prologue  to  Jeremiah  he  declares  that  he  has  omitted 
the  book  of  Baruch,  and  the  pseudepigraphic  Epistle  of  Jere- 
miah, "  setting  at  naught  the  rage  of  his  caluminators."  We 
have  no  wish  to  minimize  Jerome's  opposition  to  the  deutero- 
canonical  books.  At  times  it  was  pronounced  and  violent. 
But  he  could,  at  most,  only  be  termed  a  violent  doubter.  He 
never  was  calm  and  constant  in  his  rejection  of  those  books. 
The  fact  that,  in  such  strange  opposition,  he  was  at  variance 
with  all  his  contemporaries,  made  him  waver,  and  we  find  more 
quotations  from  deuterocanonical  Scripture  in  Jerome,  than  in 
any  other  writer  yet  quoted.  Oft  when  opposed  by  his  adversaries 
for  his  scriptural  views  he  vented  his  resentment  upon  the 
books  themselves.  Then,  when  asked  by  a  friend,  he  would 
calmly  discuss  the  merits  of  these  same  writings.  He  trans- 
lated Tobias  from  the  Chaldaic  at  the  instance  of  Chromatins 
and  Heliodorus,  the  bishops,  "judging  it  better  to  displease  the 
Pharisees,  in  order  to  grant  the  requests  of  the  bishops." 
Praef.  in  Lib.  Tob. 

In  Jerome's  mind  there  was  ever  a  conflict  between  two 
principles.  By  conviction  and  education  he  was  a  Christian, 
moulded  by  Christian  tradition.  His  higher  studies  had  made 
him  in  a  certain  sense  a  Jew.  The  weird  quaint  beauty  of  the 
Hebrew  tongue,  the  deeper  insight  into  the  substance  of  the 
Old  Law  which  only  Hebraists  can  have,  the  conviction  that 
of  all  the  Christian  writers  of  his  time,  he  alone  knew  Hebrew, 
made  him  look  with  disfavor  upon  the  books  which  the  Jews 
rejected.  It  is  an  evidence  in  favor  of  the  deuterocanonical 
books  that  they  retained  their  place  in  the  list  of  Scripture 
after  the  many  tests,  to  which  they  were  subjected.  The 
genius  of  Jerome  was  not  able  to  draw  even  one  Father  to  en- 
tertain his  views  on  the  deuterocanonical  works.     He  fluctu- 


198 


THE   CANON    OF   THE   IV.  CENTURY. 


ated  between  his  reverence  for  the  Christian  tradition,  and  his 
respect  for  the  synagogue  till  his  death,  and  contradicted  him- 
self many  times  in  his  views  on  the  books  in  question. 


Dan.  XIII.  6i. 

"  Et  consurrexerunt  adversus 
duos  presbyteros  (convicerat 
enim  eos  Daniel  ex  ore  suo  fal- 
sum  dixisse  testimonium)  fece- 
runtque,  eis  sicut  male  egerant 
adversus  proximum." 


Dan.  XIV.  35. 

"  Et  apprehendit  eum  Angelus 
Domini  in  vertice  ejus,  et  porta- 
vit  eum  capillo  capitis  sui,  posu- 
itque  eum  in  Babylon e  supra 
lacum  in  impetu  spiritus  sui." 

Sap.  I.  II. 

"Custodite  ergo  vos  a  mur- 
muratione,  quae  nihil  prodest,  et 
a  detractione  parcite  linguae, 
quoniam  sermo  obscurus  in  va- 
cuum non  ibit :  os  autem,  quod 
mentitur,  occidit  animam." 

Sap.  VI.  7. 

"  Exiguo  enim  conceditur  mi- 
sericordia ;  potentes  autem  po- 
tenter  tormenta  patientur." 

Dan.  XIII.  51. 

"  Et  dixit  ad  eos  Daniel:  Se- 
parate illos  ab  invicem  procul,  et 
dijudicabo  eos." 

Judith  XIII.  10. 

"  —  et  percussit  bis  in  cervi- 
cem  ejus,  et  abscidit  caput  ejus, 
et  abstulit  conopeum  ejus  a  co- 
lumnis,  et  evolvit  corpus  ejus 
truncum." 

Esther  XIV.  11. 

"  Ne  tradas,  Domines,  ceptrum 
tuum  his,  qui  non  sunt,  etc," 


St.  Jerome,  Epist.  I.  9, 

**  Nunc  Susanna  nobilis  fide 
omnium  subeat  mentibus,  quae 
iniquo  damnata  judicio,  Spiritu 
Sancto  puerum  replente,  salvata 
est.  Ecce  non  dispar  in  utraque 
misericordia  Domini.  Ilia  libe- 
rata  per  judicem,  ne  iret  ad 
gladium;  haec  a  judice  damnata, 
absoluta  per  gladium  est." 

Epist.  III.  I. 

"O  si  nunc  mihi  Dominus  Jesus 
Christus ....  Habacuc  ad  Dani- 
elem  translationem  concederet !" 


Epist.  XIV.  6. 

"  Os  autem  quod  mentitur  oc- 
cidit animam." 


Ibid.  9. 

"  Potentes   potenter   tormenta 
patientur." 

Ibid. 

"Presbyteros  puer  Daniel  ju- 
dical." 

Epist.  XXII.  21. 
"  Tunc  Holofernis  caput  Ju- 
dith continens  amputavit." 


Epist.  XLVIII.  14. 

"  Ne  tradas,  inquit  Esther, 
hereditatem  his  qui  non  sunt, 
idolis  scilicet  et  daemonibus." 


THE  CANON    OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 


199 


Sap.  II.  23. 

"  Quoniam  Deus  creavit  ho- 
minem  inexterminabilem,  et  ad 
imaginem  similitudinis  suae  fecit 
ilium." 

Judith  VIII.  6,  et  XIII.  9,  10. 


Eccli.  XXV.  12. 

"  Beatus,  qui  invenit  amicum 
verum,  et  qui  enarrat  justitiam 
auri  audienti." 


Epist.  LI.  6. 

"  Dicit  enim  (Salomon)  in  Sa- 
pientia  quae  titulo  ejus  inscribi- 
tur  :  *  Creavit  Deus  incorruptum 
hominem,  et  imaginem  suae  pro- 
prietatis  dedit  ei." 

Epist.  LIV.  16. 

"  Legimus  in  Judith  (si  cui 
tamen  placet  volumen  recipere) 
viduam  confectam  jejuniis  et 
habitu  lugubri  sordidatam,  quae 
non  lugebat  mortuum  virum  sed 
squalore  corporis,  Sponsi  quaere- 
bat  adventum.  Video  armatam 
gladio  manum  cruentam  dex- 
teram.  Recognosco  caput  Holo- 
phernis  de  mediis  hostibus  re- 
portatum.'  " 

Epist.  LVII.  1. 

"  Legerat  enim  (Paulus)  illud 
Jesu  :  *  Beatus  qui  in  aures  loqui- 
tur audientis.'  " 


Certainly  Jerome  does  not  wish  to  say  that  Paul  committed 
to  memory  apocryphal  Scripture. 

Eccli.  III.  33.  Epist.  LXVI.  5. 

"  Ignem    ardentem     extinguit  "  —  sciens    scriptum  :    *  Sicut 

aqua,  et  eleemosyna  resistit  pec-      aqua  extinguit  ignem  ;  ita  elee- 

mosyna,  peccatum." 


catis — ." 

Eccli.  IV.  25. 

"  Est  enim  confusio  adducens 
peccatum,  et  est  confusio  addu- 
cens gloriam  et  gratiam." 

Eccli.  XI.  27. 

"  In  die  bonorum  ne  immemor 
sis  malorum  :  et  in  die  malorum 
ne  immemor  sis  bonorum — ." 

Sap.  IV.  II. 

"  — raptus  est  ne  malitia  mu- 
taret  intellectum  ejus,  aut  ne 
fictio  deciperet  animam  illius." 


Ibid.  5. 

"Est  confusio  quae  ducit  ad 
mortem,  et  est  confusio  quae 
ducit  ad  vitam." 

Epist.  LXXVII.  6. 

"  — scilicet  in  die  bona  malo- 
rum non  oblita  est." 

Epist.  LXXIX.  2. 

"  Raptus  est  ne  malitia  muta- 
ret  mentem  ejus,  quia  placita 
erat  Deo  anima  illius." 


200 


THE  CANON   OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 


Sap.  IV.  8. 

"  Senectus  enim  venerabilis  est 
non  diuturna,  neque  annorum 
numero  computata  :  cani  autem 
sunt  sensus  hominis." 

Sap.  I.  7. 

"  Quoniam  spiritus  Domini  re- 
plevit  orbem  terrarum,  etc." 


Sap.  VIII.  2. 

"  Hanc  amavi,  et  exquisivi  a 
juventute  mea,  et  quaesivi  spon- 
sam  mihi  earn  assumere,  et  ama- 
tor  f  actus  sum  formae  illius." 


Ibid.  6. 

"  Cani  enim  hominis  sunt  sa- 
pientia  ejus." 


Epist.  XCVIII.  13. 

"  Et  alibi  legimus  :  *  Spiritus 
Domini  replevit  orbem  terra- 
rum.'  Quod  nunquam  Scriptura 
memoraret  nisi  irrationabilia 
quaeque  et  inanima  illius  nomine 
complerentur." 

Ibid.  19. 

"  —  et  in  illius  perseverantes 
amore  cantabimus  :  '  Amator  fui 
pulchritudinis  ejus.'" 


A  testimony  that  can  be  joined  with  those  of  Jerome  is 
that  of  Theophilus,  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  which  was  translated 
by  Jerome.  It  is  designated  as  Epist.  C.  in  Migne's  Works  of 
Jerome.  In  the  Ninth  Paragraph  Theophilus  speaks  of  the 
Maccabees  as  follows : 


II.  Maccab.  Passim. 


Could  the  universal  Church 
martyrs  ? 

Sap.  IX.  15. 

"  —  corpus  enim,  quod  cor- 
rumpitur,  aggravat  animam,  et 
terrena  inhabitatio  deprimit  sen- 
sum  multa  cogitantem." 

Eccli.  XXII.  6. 

"  Musica  in  luctu  importuna 
narratio." 


"Quid  memorem  insignes  Mac- 
cabaeorum  victorias  ?  qui,  ne 
illicitis  carnibus  vescerentur,  et 
communes  tangerent  cibos,  cor- 
pora obtulere  cruciatibus:  totius- 
que  orbis  in  ecclesiis  Christi  laud- 
ibus  praedicantur,  fortiores  poe- 
nis,  ardentiores  quibus  combure- 
bantur  ignibus." 

give  such  honor  to  apocryphal 

Epist.  CVIII.  22. 

"Si  non  erit  sublata  diversi- 
tate  sexus  eadem  corpora  non 
resurgent:  'Aggravat  enim  ter- 
rena inhabitatio  sensum  multa 
cogitantem.'  " 

Epist.  CXVIII.  I. 

''^ Divina  Scriptura  loquitur: 
'  Musica  in  luctu,  intempestiva 
narratio. '" 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 


201 


If  words  can  express  thoughts,  the  man  who  penned  these 
lines  believed  that  he  was  quoting  the  inspired  word  of  God. 

Eccli.  XXVII.  28.  Epist.  CXXV.  19. 

"  Qui  in  altum  mittit  lapidem,  "  Et  alibi :  *  Qui  mittit  in  al- 

super  caput  ejus  cadet  ;  et  plaga      turn   lapidem,    recidet   in   caput 
dolosa  dolosi  dividet  vulnera."  ejus.'  " 


Esther  XIV.  16. 

"Tu  scis  necessitatem  meam, 
quod  abominer  signum  superbiae 
et  gloriae  meae,  quod  est  super 
caput  meum  in  diebus  ostenta- 
tionis  meae,  et  detester  illud 
quasi  pannum  menstruatae,  etc." 

Eccli.  IV.  28. 

"  —  nee  retineas  verbum  in 
tempore  salutis." 


Eccli.  XXVIII.  28. 

"  Sepi  aures  tuas  spinis,  lin- 
guam  nequam  noli  audire,  et  ori 
tuo  facito  ostia  et  seras." 


Eccli.  XXVIII.  29—30. 

"  Aurum  tuum  et  argentum 
tuura  confla,  et  verbis  tuis  facito 
stateram,  et  frenos  ori  tuo  rec- 
tos :  et  attende,  ne  forte  labaris 
in  lingua  — ." 

Eccli.  III.  20. 

"  Quanto  magnus  es,  humilia 
te  in  omnibus,  et  coram  Deo  in- 
venies  gratiam  — ." 


Eccli.  X,  lo. 

"  Quoniam  a  Deo  profecta  est 
sapientia,  etc." 


Epist.  CXXX.  4. 

"  Oderat  ornatum  suum  et  cum 
Esther  loquebatur  ad  Dominum  : 

*  Tu  nosti  quod  oderim  insigne 
capitis  mei,  et  tantae  ducam  im- 
munditiae  velut  pannum  men- 
struatae.' " 

Epist.  CXLVIII.  2. 

" —  illud  mecum  Scripturae 
reputans  :  '  Tempus  tacendi,  et 
tempus  loquendi.'  Et  iterum  : 
'  Ne  retineas  verbum  in  tempore 
salutis.'  " 

Ibid.  16. 

"  Noli,"  inquit Scriptura,  'con- 
sentaneus  esse,   etc'      Et  alibi : 

*  Sepi  aures  tuas  spinis,  et  noli 
audire  linguam  nequam.' " 

Ibid.  18. 

"Unde  Scriptura  dicit :  'Ar- 
gentum et  aurum  tuum  confla,  et 
verbis  tuis  facito  stateram  et 
frenos  ori  tuo  rectos  :  et  attende 
ne  forte  labaris  lingua.*  " 

Ibid.  20. 

"Unde  Scriptura  dicit:  'Quanto 
magnus  es  ;  humilia  te  in  omni- 
bus, et  coram  Deo  invenies  gra- 
tiam.' " 

St,  Jerome,  Interpretatio  Lib. 
Didymi,  10, 

"Dominus,'  inquit,  'dabit 
sapientiam,  et  a  facie  ejus  sapien- 
tia et  intellectus  procedit.' " 


202 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 


Sap.  VI.  26. 

"  Multitude  autem  sapientium 
sanitas  est  orbis  terrarum ;  et 
rex  sapiens  stabilimentum  populi 
est." 

Tob.  IV.  16. 

"  Quod  ab  alio  oderis  fieri  tibi, 
etc." 

Sap.  XI.  27. 

"Parcis  autem  omnibus,  quo- 
niam  tua  sunt,  Domine,  qui  amas 
animas." 


Dan.  XIII.  Passim. 


Sap.  VI.  7. 

"  Exiguo  enim  conceditur  mi- 
sericordia ;  potentes  autem  po- 
tenter  tormenta  patientur." 


Sap.  I.  4—5. 

"  Quoniam  in  malevolam  ani- 
mam  non  introibit  sapientia,  nee 
habitabit  in  corpore  subdito  pec- 
catis.  Spiritus  enim  sanctus  dis- 
ciplinae  effugiet  fictum,  et  auferet 
se  a  cogitationibus,  quae  sunt 
sine  intellectu,  et  corripietur  a 
superveniente  iniquitate." 

Sap.  I.  II. 

"  Custodite  ergo  vos  a  mur- 
muratione,  quae  nihil  prodest,  et 
a  detractione  parcite  linguae, 
quoniam  sermo  obscurus  in  va- 
cuum non  ibit :  os  autem,  quod 
mentitur,  occidit  animam." 


Ibid.  21. 

"Multitudo  quippe  sapientium, 
salus  mundi." 


Ibid.  39. 

"  Quod  tibi  non  vis  fieri,  etc." 

Ibid.  46. 

"  —  juxta  illud  quod  alibi  scri- 
bitur  :  *  Parces  autem  omnibus, 
Domine  amator  animarum,  quia 
tuae  sunt,  neque  enim  odies  quos 
fecisti.' " 

Adversus  Jovinian,  25. 

"Erat  igitur  Daniel  adhuc 
puer,  et  notus  populo  vel  propter 
interpretationem  somniorum  re- 
gis vel  propter  Susannae  libera- 
tionem  et  occisionem  presby- 
terorum." 

Adversus  Jov.  Lib.  II.  25. 

" —  quanto  majoris  criminis, 
tanto  majoris  et  poenae.  '  Poten- 
tes enim  potenter  tormenta  pa- 
tientur.'" 

Apologia  Adversus  Rufinum 
17. 

"  Loquitur  et  Sapientia  quam 
sub  nomine  Salomonis  legimus  : 
*  In  malevolam  animam  nunquam 
intrabit  sapientia,  nee  habitabit 
in  corpore  subdito  peccatis.  Spi- 
ritus enim  Sanctus  eruditionis 
fugiet  dolum  et  recedet  a  cogita- 
tionibus stultis.' " 

Adversus  Rufinum  Lib.  III.  26. 
**  Os  quod  mentitur  occidit  an- 
imam." 


THE   CANON    OF   THE   IV.  CENTURY. 


203 


Eccli.   III.   22. 

"Altiora  te  ne  quaesieris,  et 
fortiora  te  ne  scrutatus  fueris, 
etc." 


II.  Maccab.  V.  Passim. 


Tob.  XII.  7. 

"  Etenim  sacramentum  regis 
abscondere  bonum  est,  etc." 

Eccli.  I.  S3' 

"Fili,  concupiscens  sapientiam, 
conserva  justitiam,  et  Deus  prae- 
bebit  illam  tibi." 

Eccli.  XXVII.  29. 

'*  Et  qui  foveam  fodit,  incidet 
in  earn  :  et  qui  statuit  lapidem 
proximo,  offendet  in  eo  :  et  qui 
laqueum  alii  ponit,  peribit  in 
illo." 

Sap.  VI.  7. 

(Oft  quoted.) 


Sap.  II.  12. 

"  Circumveniamus  ergo  jus- 
tum,  quoniam  inutilis  est  nobis, 
etc." 

Dan.  XIII.  Passim. 


Adversus  Pelagianos  Lib.  1. 33. 

"  Respondet  stultae  interroga- 
tioni  tuae  liber  Sapientiae:  'Alti- 
ora  te  ne  quaesieris,  et  fortiora 
te  ne  scrutatus  fueris.'  " 

Adversus  Pelagianos  Lib.  II. 
30. 

"  Antiochus  Epiphanius  rex 
crudelissimus  subvertit  altare, 
ipsamque  justitiam  fecit  concul- 
cari,  quia  concessum  erat  a  Do- 
mino, causasque  reddit  propter 
peccata  plurima." 

Comment,  in  Eccles.  Cap.VIII. 

"Et  hoc  est  quod  in  libro 
Tobiae  scribitur  :  '  Mysterium 
regis  abscondere  bonum  est.'  " 

Ibid.  Cap.  IX. 

**  Dato  nobis  itaque  praecepto 
quod  dicit :  '  Desiderasti  sapien- 
tiam, serva  mandata,  et  Dominus 
ministrabit  tibi  eam.'  " 

Ibid.  Cap.  X. 

**  Siquidem  et  alibi  ipse  Salo- 
mon ait :  *  Qui  statuit  laqueam, 
capietur  in  illo.'  " 


Comment,  in  Isaiam,  Cap.  I. 
Vers.  24. 

"  —  de  quibus  scriptum  est  : 
'  potentes  potenter  tormenta  pa- 
tientur.'  "     (Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  Lib.  IL  Cap.  III.  Vers.  i. 

" — cogitastis  consilium  pessi- 
mum  dicentes  :  *  Alligemus  jus- 
tum,  quia  inutilis  est  nobis.'  " 

Ibid.  Vers.  2. 

"  Et  inveteratos  dierum  malo- 
rum  duos  presbyteros  juxta 
Theodotionem  in  Danielis  prin- 
cipio  legimus." 


204 


THE  CANON   OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 


Sap.  IV.  8. 

"  Senectus  enim  venerabilis  est 
non  diuturna,  neque  annorum 
numero  computata  :  cani  autem 
sunt  sensus  hominis," 


Ibid. 

"  —  de  qua  scriptum  est  : 
'  Canities  hominum,  prudentia 
est.'" 

Ibid.  Vers.  3. 

*'  Unde  et  illud  in  nostris  libris 
legimus  :  '  Amici  tibi  sint  pluri- 
mi,  consiliarius  autem  unus  de 
mille.'  " 


Eccli.  VII.  6. 

*'  Noli  quaerere  fieri  judex, 
nisi  valeas  virtute  irrumpere  ini- 
quitates,  etc." 

Eccli.  XI.  30. 

"  Ante  mortem  ne  laudes  ho- 
minem  quemquam,  quoniam  in 
filiis  suis  agnoscitur  vir." 

Ecccli.  XIII.  I. 

"  Qui  tetigerit  picem,  inquina- 
bitur  ab  ea,  etc." 


Esther.    Passim. 


Dan.  XIII.  56. 

"  Et,  amoto  eo,  jussit  venire 
alium,  et  dixit  ei :  Semen  Cha- 
naan,  et  non  Juda,  species  de- 
cepit  te,  etc." 

Sap.  IV.  8. 

(Oft  quoted.) 
Eccli.  I.  33. 

(Oft  quoted.) 


Ibid.  Vers.  7. 

"  — aliudque  mandatum  :  *  Ne 
quaeras  judex  fieri:  ne  forte  non 
possis  auferre  iniquitates.'  " 

Ibid.  Vers.  12. 

" — nee  praevenit  sententiam 
judicis  sui,  dicente  Scriptura  sanc- 
ta :  *  Ne  beatum  dicas  quemquam 
hominem  ante  mortem.'  " 

Ibid.  Lib.  III.  Cap.  VI.  Vers.  5. 

"Ex  quo  ostenditur  noxium 
esse  vivere  cum  peccatoribus : 
'  Qui  enim  tangit  picem,  inquin- 
abitur  ab  ea.'  " 

Ibid.  Lib.  V.  Cap.  XIV.  Vers.  2. 

"  Potest  et  in  Assueri  tempori- 
busintelligi,quando,  occisoHolo- 
pherne,  hostilis  ab  Israel  est 
caesus  exercitus." 

Ibid.  Lib.  VII.  Cap.  XXIIL 
Vers.  12. 

"  Unde  et  ad  senem  adulterum 
dicitur:  '  Semen  Chanaan  et  non 
Juda,  species  decepit  te.'  " 

Ibid.  Lib.  VIII.  Cap.  XXIV. 
Vers.  21. 

(Oft  quoted.) 
Ibid.  Cap.  XXVI.  Vers.  4. 
"  Unde  et  in  alio  loco  scribi- 
tur :      '  Desiderasti     sapientiam, 
serva  mandata,  et  Dominus  tri- 
buet  tibi  eam.' " 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   IV.  CENTURY. 


205 


Sap.  VI.  7. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Sap.  IX.  6. 

"  Nam  et  si  quis  erit  consum- 
matus  inter  filios  hominum,  si  ab 
illo  abfuerit  sapientia  tua,  in 
nihilum  computabitur." 

Eccli.  X.  9. 

"  Avaro  autem  nihil  est  sceles- 
tius.  Quid  superbit  terra  et 
cinis  ?" 

Sap.  III.  13,  14. 

"  Maledicta  creatura  eorum, 
quoniam  felix  est  sterilis,  et  in- 
coinquinata,  quae  nescivit  tho- 
rum  in  delicto,  habebit  fructum 
in  respectione  animarum  sancta- 
rum  :  et  spado,  qui  non  operatus 
est  per  manus  suas  iniquitatem, 
nee  cogitavit  adversus  Deum 
nequissima :  dabitur  enim  illi 
fidei  donum  electum,  et  sors  in 
templo  Dei  acceptissima." 


Sap.  I.  I. 

"  Diligite  justitiam,  qui  judi- 
catis  terram.  Sentite  de  Domino 
in  bonitate,  etc." 

Eccli.  XXV.  12. 

" —  beatus,  qui  invenit  ami- 
cum  verum,  et  qui  enarrat  justi- 
tiam auri  audienti  — ." 


Sap.  I.  4. 

"  Quoniam  in  malevolam  ani- 
mam  non  introibit  sapientia,  nee 
habitabit  in  corpore  subdito  pee- 
eatis." 


Ibid.   Lib.    IX.   Cap.   XVIII. 
Vers.  23  et  seqq. 
(Oft  quoted.) 
Ibid.  Cap.  XXIX.  Vers.  15,  16. 
"  — cum  scriptum  sit  de  Dei 
Sapientia  :  '  Si  enim  quis  perfec- 
tus  fuerit  in  filiis  hominum  abs- 
que tua  sapientia,  in  nihil  repu- 
tabitur.'  " 

Ibid.  Lib.  XIV.  Praef. 
"  De  quo  scribitur  :  '  Quid  glo- 
riatur  terra  et  cinis  ?'  " 

Ibid.    Lib.    XV.    Cap.    LVI. 
Vers.  4,  5. 

"  Qui  sint  eunuchi  supra  dixi- 
mus quibus  loquitur  et  Sa- 
pientia quae  titulo  Salomonis  in- 
scribitur  :  '  Beata  sterilis  imma- 
culata,  quae  non  cognovit  stra- 
tum in  delicto ;  habebit  fructum 
in  visitatione  animarum.  Et 
eunuchus  qui  non  est  operatus 
manu  iniquitatem,  neque  cogita- 
vit contra  Dominum  mala.  Dabi- 
tur enim  fidei  ejus  electa  gratia 
et  pars  in  templo  Domini  delec- 
tabilis."* 

Ibid.  Cap.  LVI.  Vers.  10—12. 

" —  et  audiamus  Scripturam 
monentem  :  '  Sapite  de  Domino 
in  bonitate.' " 

Ibid.  Lib.  XVI.  Praef. 

"  Ac  ne  a  profanis  tantum  su- 
mere  videor  exemplum,  nimirum 
hoc  illud  est  quod  aliis  verbis 
Propheta  demonstrat :  'Beatus 
qui  in  aures  loquitur  audien- 
tium." 

Ibid.  Vers.  15. 

"  Et  quomodo  in  perversam 
animam  non  ingreditur  sapientia, 
neque  habitabit  in  corpore  sub- 
dito peecatis.' " 


206 


THE  CANON   OF  THE   IV.  CENTURY. 


Sap.  I.  5. 

"  Spiritus  enim  Sanctus  discip- 
linae  effugiet  fictum,  et  auferet  se 
a  cogitationibus,  etc." 


Eccli.  XVI.  18. 

"  Ecce  coelum,  et  coeli  coelo- 
rum,  abyssus,  et  universa  terra, 
quae  in  eis  sunt,  in  conspectu 
illius  commovebuntur." 

Esther  XIV.  16. 

*'  Tu  scis  necessitatem  meam, 
quod  abominer  signum  superbiae 
et  gloriae  meae,  quod  est  super 
caput  meum  in  diebus  ostenta- 
tionis  meae,  et  detester  illud 
quasi  pannum  menstruatae,  et 
non  portem  in  diebus  silentii 
mei  — . 


Esther  XIV.  11. 

"  Ne  tradas,  Domine,  sceptrum 
tuum  his,  qui  non  sunt,  etc." 


Eccli.  XI.  27,  29. 

"  In  die  bonorum  ne  immemor 
sis  malorum,  et  in  die  malorum 
ne  immemor  sis  bonorum.  Ma- 
litia  horae  oblivionem  facit  luxu- 
riae  magnae,  et  in  fine  hominis 
denudatio  operum  illius." 

Sap.  VI.  7. 

(Oft  quoted.) 
Ibid. 


Ibid.  Lib.  XVII.  Cap.  LXIII. 
Vers.  10. 

"  De  quo  et  in  Sapientia  reperi- 
mus  quae  nomine  Salomonis  scri- 
bitur ;  *  Sanctus  enim  Spiritus 
disciplinae  fugiet  dolum,  et  rece- 
det  a  cogitationibus  stultis.'" 

Ibid.  Vers.  15. 

"  Denique  Salomon  qui  aedi- 
ficavit  domum  Dei,  ad  eum  pre- 
cans  loquitur  :  '  Coeli  coelorum 
et  terra  non  sufficiunt  tibi.' " 

Ibid.  Lib.  XVII.  Cap.  LXIV. 
Vers.  6. 

"  —  cui  et  Esther  diadema 
suum  quod  erat  regiae  potestatis 
insigne  comparat  quod  nequa- 
quam  voluntate  sed  necessitate 
portabat :  *  Tu  scis  necessitatem 
meam  :  quoniam  detestor  signum 
superbiae  meae,  quod  est  super 
caput  meum  in  diebus  ostensio- 
nis  meae  :  abominor  illud  sicut 
pannum  menstruum  :  nee  porto 
in  diebus  quietis.' " 

Ibid.  Lib.  XVIII.  Cap.  LXV. 
Vers.  3. 

"Unde  et  Esther  loquitur  ad 
Dominum  :  '  Ne  tradas  haeredi- 
tatem  tuam  his  qui  non  sunt.' " 

Ibid.  Vers.  17,  18. 

"  —  juxta  illud  quod  scriptum 
est :  *  In  die  bona,  oblivio  malo- 
rum, et  alibi :  Afflictio  horae  ob- 
livionem facit  deliciarum.' " 


Ibid.  Vers.  20. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Comment,  in  Jerem.  Lib.  III. 
Cap.  XII.  Vers.  13. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE   IV.  CENTURY. 


207 


Sap.  I.  4. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Eccli.  XXII.  II. 
**  Modicum  plora  supra  mor- 
tuum,  quoniam  requievit." 


Ibid.  Lib.  IV.  Cap.  XVIII. 
Vers.  18. 

"  —  dicente  Scriptura :  *  In 
perversam  animam  non  intrabit 
Sapientia.'  " 

Ibid.  Cap.  XXI.  Vers.  14. 

"  —  juxta  illud  quod  scriptum 
est :  Mors  viro  requies  cui  clau- 
sit  Deus  viam  suam. 


The  same  quotation  appears  in  the  XXVIII.  Chapter,  fifth 
and  following  verses. 

Ibid.    Lib.    V.    Cap.    XXIX. 

Vers.  I  et  seqq. 
"  Et  in  alio  loco  (scribit  Salo- 
mon): *  Hanc  exquisivi  sponsam 
accipere  mihi,  et  amator  factus 
sum  decoris  ejus.' " 

Ibid.  Cap.  XXIX.  Vers.  21  et 
seqq. 

" — quorum  uni  loquitur  Dan- 
iel: *  Inveterate  dierum  malorum. 
Et  alteri:  Semen  Chanaan  et  non 
Juda,  species  decepit  te,  et  con- 
cupiscentia  subvertit  cor  tuum. 
Sic  faciebatis  filiabus  Israel  et 
illae  metuentes  loquebantur  vo- 
biscum,  sed  non  filia  Juda  sus- 
tinuit  iniquitatem  vestram.*  " 

Comment,  in  Ezechiel,  Praef. 

"  —  nee  putavi  illam  senten- 
tiam  negligendam  :  '  Musica  in 
luctu,  importuna  narratio.'  " 

Ibid.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  V.  Vers. 
8,9. 

Ibid.  Cap.  VI.  Vers.  9,  10. 

"  Quam  ob  causam  et  in  Dan- 
iele  duo  presbyteri  praeceperunt 
revelari  Susannam  ut  nudati  cor- 
poris decore  fruerentur." 

Ibid.  Lib.  IV.  Cap.  XVI.  Vers. 

3- 
"  Mirabilis  Daniel  qui  ad  pres- 
byterum  delinquentem,  et  adul- 


Sap.  VIIL  2. 

Hanc  amavi,  et  exquisivi  a  ju- 
ventute  mea,  et  quaesivi  sponsam 
mihi  eam  assumere,  et  amator 
factus  sum  formae  illius." 

Dan.  XIIL  56,  57. 

"  Et,  amoto  eo,  jussit  venire 
alium,  et  dixit  ei  :  Semen  Cha- 
naan et  non  Juda,  species  decepit 
te,  et  concupiscentia  subvertit 
cor  tuum  :  sic  faciebatis  filiabus 
Israel,  et  illae  timentes  loque- 
bantur vobis,  sed  filia  Juda  non 
sustinuit  iniquitatem  vestram." 

Eccli.  XXII.  6. 

"  Musica  in  luctu  importuna 
narratio,  etc." 


Sap.  VI.  7. 

Dan.  XIII.  32. 

"  At  iniqui  illi  jusserunt  ut 
discooperiretur  (erat  enim  coo- 
perta)  ut  vel  sic  satiarentur  de- 
core  ejus." 


Dan.  XIIL  56. 

(Oft  quoted.) 


THE  CANON    OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 

terio  jungentem  homicidium  puer 
ausus  est  dicere  :  '  Semen  Cha- 
naan  et  non  Juda,  species  decepit 
te.' " 

Sap.  VII.  22.  Ibid.  Vers.  lo. 

"  — est  enim  in  ilia  spiritus  in-  "  Nam  et   in  libro  Sapientiae 

telligentiae,  sanctus,  unicus,  mul-  qui  a  quibusdam  Salomonis  in- 

tiplex,  subtilis,  disertus,  mobilis,  scribitur,  spiritus  sapientiae  uni- 

incoinquinatus,     certus,    suavis,  genitus   et   multiplex    tenuis   et 

amans     bonum,     acutus,    quem  mutabilis  appellatur." 
nihil  vetat,  benefaciens — ." 

In  the  fifth  book  Jerome  quotes  frequently  the  sentence  of 
Wisdom  VI.  7  :  "  Potentes  potenter  tormenta  patientur." 

Lib.  V.  Cap.  XVI.  Vers.  59  et 
Eccli.  XV.  9.  seqq. 

"  Non  est  speciosa  laus  in  ore  "  Non  est  pulchra  laudatio  in 

peccatoris — ."  ore  peccatoris." 

Ibid.    Lib.   VI.    Cap.   XVIIL 
Eccli.  III.  22.  Vers.  6  et  seqq. 

"  Altiora  te  ne  quaesieris,  et         "  Sed  et  illud  quod  alibi  dici- 
fortiora  te  ne  scrutatus  fueris  :      tur  :  '  Majora  te  non  requiras,  et 
sed  quae  praecepit  tibi  Deus,  ilia      fortiora  te  non  scruteris.'  " 
cogita    semper,    et    in    pluribus 
operibus  ejus  ne  fueris  curiosus." 

Eccli.  XXXII.  I.  Ibid. 

"  Rectorem  te  posuerunt  ?  noli  "  De    quibus    scriptum    est  : 

extolli :  esto  in  illis  quasi  unus      '  Principem  te  constituerunt  ?  ne 
ex  ipsis."  eleveris  :    esto    inter   eos    quasi 

unus  ex  ipsis.'  " 

Eccli.  X.  9.  Ibid. 

"  Avaro  autem  nihil  est  sceles-         " — cui  illud  convenit  :  'Quid 
tius.      Quid    superbit    terra    et     gioriatur  terra  et  cinis  ?'  " 
cinis  ?" 

Ibid.  Lib.  VIII.  Cap.  XXVIL 
Esther  XIV.  11.  Vers.  19. 

"Ne  tradas,  Domine,  sceptrum         "  Unde  et  Esther  contra  idola 
tuum  his,  qui  non  sunt,  etc."  loquens  :    *  Ne    tradas,'    inquit, 

*  sceptrum    tuum    his    qui    non 
sunt.'  " 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 


209 


The  same  quotation  occurs  again  in  the  thirty-third  verse 
of  the  same  chapter  of  the  commentary. 

Ibid.    Lib.   IX.   Cap.    XXIX. 


Sap.  VI.  7. 

"  Exiguo  enim  conceditur  mis- 
ericordia:  potentes  autem  poten- 
ter  tormenta  patientur." 

Eccli.  I.  2. 

"  Arenam  maris,  at  pluviae 
guttas,  at  dies  saeculi  quis  dinu- 
meravit  ?  Altitudinam  caali,  at 
latitudinam  tarraa,  at  profundum 
abyssi  quis  dimansus  est  ?" 

Eccli.  XXVII.  29. 
"  Et  qui  foveam  fodit,  incidat 
in  earn,  etc." 

Eccli.  XX.  32. 

"  Sapientia  absconsa  et  the- 
saurus invisus  :  quae  utilitas  in 
utrisque  ?" 

Eccli.  VII.  6. 

"  Noli  quaerere  fieri  judex, 
nisi  valaas  virtute  irrumpera  ini- 
quitates  :  ne  forte  extimescas  fa- 
ciem  potentis,  et  ponas  scan- 
dalum  in  aequitate  tua." 

Eccli.  III.  29. 

"  Cor  nequam  gravabitur  in 
doloribus,  et  peccator  adjiciet  ad 
peccandum." 

Eccli.  XXXII.  I. 

*'  Ractoram  te  posuerunt  ?  noli 
axtolli :  asto  in  illis  quasi  unus 
ex  ipsis." 

Eccli.  I.  2. 

(Already  quoted.) 

N 


Vers.  8  at  seqq. 


Ibid.  Cap.  XXX.  Vers.  20  at 

seqq. 
"  Et  in  alio  loco:  'Abyssum  at 
sapientiam  quis  investigabit  ?'  " 


Ibid.  Lib.  X.  Cap.  XXXII. 
Vers,  17  et  seqq. 

"  Qui  enim  fodit  foveam  inci- 
det  in  earn." 

Ibid.  Cap.  XXXIII.  Vers,  i  et 
seqq. 

**  De  magistris  negligentibus 
Salomon  loquitur :  '  Sapientia 
abscondita,  et  thesauros  occul- 
tus,  quae  utilitas  in  utrisque  ? '  " 

Ibid.  Lib.  XL  Cap.  XXXIV.  i. 

"  Unde  magnopera  cavendum 
est  et  observanda  ilia  praecepta  : 
'  Ne  quaeras  judex  fieri,  ne  forte 
non  possis  auferre  iniquitates.* 
Et  iterum  :  *  Quanto  major  as, 
tanto  magis  te  humilia,  et  in  con- 
spectu  Domini  invenias  gratiam.' 
Et  rursum  :  *  Ducam  te  constitu- 
erunt,  ne  eleveris  :  sed  esto  inter 
eos  quasi  unus  ex  illis.'  " 


Ibid.  Lib.  XIIL  Cap.  XLIII. 

Vers.  13  et  seqq. 
"  Scriptura  est :   '  Abyssum  et 
sapientiam  quis  investigabit  ? '  " 


210 


THE  CANON   OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 


Eccli.  XXXII.  I. 

(Already  quoted.) 
Eccli.  XXVIII.  29. 
"  —  et  verbis  tuis  facito  sta- 
teram,  et  frenos  ori  tuo  rectos." 


Ibid.  Cap.  XLV.  9. 


Sap.  I.  4. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Ibid.  Vers.  10  et  seqq. 

"  —  dicente  Scriptura  :  *  Ser- 
monibus  tuis  facies  stateram  et 
appendiculutn,' " 

Comment,  in  Daniel,  Cap.   II. 

Vers.  21. 
"  In  perversam  autem  animam 
non  introibit  sapientia." 

In  this  same  chapter  he  inveighs  against  the  deuterocanoni- 
cal  fragments  of  Daniel.  In  the  23d  verse  he  says :  "  And 
observe  that  Daniel  is  of  the  sons  of  Juda,  not  a  priest  as  the 
fable  of  Bel  declares."  Coming  to  the  Canticle  of  the  youths 
in  the  fiery  furnace,  he  prefaces  his  commentary  on  it  as  fol- 
lows :  "  Hitherto  the  Hebrews  read  :  what  follows  even  to 
the  end  of  the  Canticle  of  the  three  youths  is  not  contained  in 
Hebrew ;  concerning  which,  lest  we  may  seem  to  have  passed 
it  by,  a  few  words  are  to  be  said."  He  then  proceeds  to  com- 
ment it  in  the  same  manner  as  the  other  portions  of  the  book. 


I.  et  II.  Maccab.  Passim. 


Sap.  IV.  8. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Sap.  III.  13. 

"  Maledicta  creatura  eorum, 
quoniam  felix  est  sterilis,  et  in- 
coinquinata,  quae  nescivit  tho- 
rum  in  delicto,  etc." 


Ibid.  Cap.  VIII.  Vers.  14. 
"  Legamus  Maccabaeorum  lib- 
ros  et  Josephi  historiam." 

Ibid.  Cap.  XI.  Vers.  34,  35. 
"Lege  Maccabaeorum  libros." 

Ibid.  Cap.  XII.  Vers,  i  et 
seqq. 

"  Ponit  quoque  historiam  de 
Maccabaeis  in  qua  dicitur  mul- 
tos  Judaeorum  sub  Mathathia  et 
Juda  Maccabaeo  ad  eremum  con- 
fugisse,  et  latuisse  in  speluncis  et 
in  cavernis  petrarum,  et  post  vic- 
toriam  processisse. 

Comment,  in  Osee  Lib.  Cap. 
VII.  8,  10. 

(Oft  quoted.) 
Ibid.  Cap.  X.  Vers.  14. 
*'  Beata     sterilis     immaculata 
quae  non  cognovit  cubile  in  pec- 
cato." 


THE  CANON    OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 


211 


"  Ex  iniquo    enim    concubitu 
semen  peribit." 


Sap.  III.  i6.  Ibid. 

Filii  autem  adulterorum  in  in- 
consummatione  erunt,  et  ab  ini- 
quo thoro  semen  exterminabi- 
tur." 

He  quotes  again  Sap.  VI.  7,  in  Lib.  III.  Cap.  XI.  Vers. 
8  et  9. 


Dan.  XIII.  56. 

"Et,  amoto  eo,  jussit  venire, 
alium,  et  dixit  ei :  Semen  Cha- 
naan  etnon  Juda,  species  decepit 
te,  et  concupiscentia  subvertit 
cor  tuum  — ." 


Ibid.  Cap.  XII.  Vers.  7,  8. 

"  Semen  Chanaan  et  non  Juda, 
species  decepit  te." 


Eccli.  XVI.  19. 

"  —  montes  simul,  et  colles,  et 
fundamenta  terrae ;  cum  con- 
spexerit  ilia  Deus,  tremore  con- 
cutientur." 

Eccli.  XV.  9. 

"  Non  est  speciosa  laus  in  ore 
peccatoris." 

In  Lib.  III.  Cap.  VI.  Vers 
Sap.  VI.  7. 

Ibid.  Vers.  12,  he  repeats  Esther  XIV.  11. 


Comment,  in  Amos,  Lib.  II. 
Cap.  IV.  Vers.  12,  13. 

"  Iste  est  qui  firmat  tonitruum, 
sive  montes  confirmat,  ad  cujus 
vocem  coelorum  cardines  et  terrae 
fundamenta  quatiuntur" 

Ibid.  Cap.  V.  Vers.  25. 

"  —  quia  non  est  pulchra  lau- 
datio  in  ore  peccatoris." 

7  et  seqq.,  he  quotes  again 


Tob.  XIV.  5—6  (juxta  LXX.) 

**  Magnopere  autem  senuit :  et 
vocavit  filium  suum  et  filios  ejus, 
et  dixit  ei:  fili,  accipe  filios  tuos: 
ecce  senui,  et  ad  exeundum  e 
vita  sum  :  abi  in  Mediam,  fili, 
quoniam  credidi  quaecumque  lo- 
cutus  est  Jonas  Propheta  de 
Ninive  quia  subvertetur." 


In  Jonam,  Prologus. 

"Liber  quoque  Tobiae,  licet 
non  habeatur  in  Canone,  tamen 
quia  usurpatur  ab  Ecclesiasticis 
viris,  tale  quid  memorat,  dicente 
Tobia  ad  filium  suum  :  *  Fili,  ecce 
senui,  et  in  eo  sum  ut  revertar  de 
vita   mea :   tolle  filios   meos,   et 
vade  in  mediam;  fili,  scio  enim 
quae  locutus  est  Jonas  propheta 
de    Ninive,   quoniam    subverte- 
tur.'" 
When  Jerome  speaks  of  the  Canon,  he  evidently  means  the 
collection  of  the  Jews.     He  clearly  testifies  here  that  tradition 
favored  Tobias,  although  it  was  not  received  by  the  Jews,  and 
he  is  disposed  to  give  a  certain  reverence  to  the  book  on  ac- 
count of  its  use  by  the  Fathers. 


212 


THE   CANON    OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 


Judith  XVI.  3. 

"  Dominus     conterens     bella, 
Dominus  nomen  est  illi. 


Eccli.  XX.  31. 

"  Xenia  et  dona  excaecant 
oculos  judicum,  et  quasi  mutus 
in  ore  avertit  correptiones  eo- 
rum." 

Eccli.  VI.  7. 

"  Si  possides  amicum,  in  tenta- 
tione  posside  eum,  etc." 


Comment,  in  Michaeam,  Lib. 
I.  Cap.  II.  Vers.  6,  8. 

"Recedente  autem  pace  et 
auxilio  Dei,  quia  restiterant  Do- 
mino, de  quo  dicitur  :  *  Dominus 
conterens  bella,  Dominus  nomen 
ei.' " 

Ibid.  Cap.  III.  Vers.  9  et  seqq. 

"  Munera  excaecant  oculos 
etiam  Sapientium,  et  quasi  fre- 
num  in  ore  avertunt  increpatio- 
nem." 

Ibid.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  VII.  Vers. 
5.  7- 

"  Unde  dicitur  :  '  Si  habes 
amicum,  in  tentatione  posside 
eum.'  " 

Ibid.  Vers.  14  seqq. 

**  —  et  erunt  in  confusione 
quae  ducit  ad  vitam." 


Eccli.  IV.  25. 

"  Est  enim  confusio  adducens 
peccatum,  et  est  confusio  addu- 
cens gloriam  et  gratiam." 

In  Nahum,  Cap.  III.  Vers.  8  seqq.,  he  quotes  again  the  oft- 
quoted  sentence  from  Dan.  XIII.  56. 

Dan.  XIV.  35.  Prologus  in  Habacuc. 

"  Et  apprehendit  eum  Angelus  "  — Daniel  docere  te   poterit. 


Domini  in  vertice  ejus,  et  porta- 
vit  eum  capillo  capitis  sui,  posu- 
itque  eum  in  Babylone  supra 
lacum  in  impetu  spiritus  sui." 

Eccli.  I.  2. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Eccli.  XX.  32. 

"  Sapientia  absconsa  et  the- 
saurus invisus  :  quae  utilitas  in 
utrisque  ?" 


ad  quem  in  lacum  leonum  Haba- 
cuc cum  prandio  mittitur." 


Comment,  in  Habacuc,  Lib.  II. 
Cap.  III.  Vers,  ir,  seqq. 

"Et  pulchre  opinationem  phan- 
tasiae  altitudinem  vocat  juxta 
Jesuni  filium  Sirach,  qui  ait : 
*  Abyssum  et  sapientiam  quis  in- 
vestigabit  ? '  " 

Comment,  in  Sophoniam,  Cap. 
II.  Vers.  3,  4. 

" — hoc  est,  alios  doceant:  '  Sa- 
pientia enim  abscondita  et  the- 
saurus non  comparens,  quae  util- 
itas in  ambobus  ?" 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 


213 


Dan.  XIII.  56. 

**  Et,  amoto  eo,  jussit  venire 
alium,  et  dixit  ei :  Semen  Cha- 
naan,  et  non  Juda,  etc." 


Sap.  VI.  7. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Eccli.  XXVII.  28. 

**  Qui  in  altum  mittit  lapidem, 
super  caput  ejus  cadet :  et  plaga 
dolosa  dolosi  dividet  vulnera." 


Judith.    Passim. 


Eccli.  IV.  10. 

"  In  judicando  esto  pupillis 
misericors  ut  pater,  et  pro  viro 
matri  illorum — ." 


Sap.  I.  2. 

"  — quoniam  invenitur  ab  his, 
qui  non  tentant  ilium  :  apparet 
autem  eis,  qui  fidem  habent  in 
ilium — ." 

Sap.  IX.  15. 

"  Corpus  enim,  quod  corrum- 
pitur,  aggravat  animam,  et  ter- 
rena  inhabitatio  deprimit  sensum 
multa  cogitantem." 

Maccab.    Passim. 


Ibid.  Vers.  8  seqq. 

"Et  ad  presbyteros  cupientes 
sub  figura  Susannae  Ecclesiae 
corrumpere  castitatem  dicat 
Daniel  :  '  Hoc  est  judicium  Dei, 
Semen  Chanaan  et  non  Juda.'  " 

Ibid.  Cap.  III.  Vers.  8,  9. 

Ibid.  Vers.  19,  20. 

"  — et  de  Jesu  filio  Sirach  tes- 
timonium proferamus:  'Qui  mit- 
tit lapidem  in  excelsum,  super 
caput  suum  mittit.' " 

Comment,  in  Haggai,  Cap.  I. 
Vers.  5,  6. 

"  Similiter  qui  penitus  noh 
bibit,  siti  peribit,  sicut  et  in  Ju- 
dith (si  quis  tamen  vult  librum 
recipere  mulieris)  et  parvuli  siti 
perierunt." 

Comment,  in  Zachariam,  Lib. 
II.  Cap.  VII.  Vers.  8  et  seqq. 

"Viduam  quoque  et  pupillum 
de  quibus  nobis  praeceptum  est : 
'  Esto  pupillis  pater,  et  pro  viro 
matri  eorum,  judicans  pupillum 
et  justificans  viduam.'  " 

Ibid.  Cap.  VIII.  Vers.  21,  22. 

"  Appropinquat  enim  Dominus 
his  qui  non  tentant  eum,  et  os- 
tendit  faciem  suam  his  qui  non 
sunt  increduli." 

Ibid.  Cap.  IX.  Vers.  15,  16. 
"  — quia  aggravat  terrena  hab- 
itatio  sensum  multa  curantem." 


Ibid.  Cap.  X.  Vers.  I.  seqq. 

"  Ita  felicitas  Maccabaeorum 
tempore  promissa  est,  quando 
sancti  lapides  elevati  sunt  super 
terram,  etc." 


214 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   IV.   CENTURY. 


Sap.  I.  14. 

"Creavit  enim,  ut  essent  omnia: 
et  sanabiles  fecit  nationes  orbis 
terrarura :  et  non  est  in  illis 
medicamentum  exterminii,  nee 
inferorum  regnum  in  terra." 


Sap.  IX.  16—18. 

"  Quae  autem  in  caelis  sunt 
quis  investigabit  ?  Sensum  autem 
tuum  quis  sciet,  nisi  tu  dederis 
sapientiam,  et  miseris  spiritum 
sanctum  tuum  de  altissimis  :  et 
sic  correctae  sint  semitae  eorum, 
qui  sunt  in  terris,  et  quae  tibi 
placent  didicerint  homines  ? " 

Sap.  IV.  8. 

"  Senectus  enim  venerabilis  est 
non  diuturna,  neque  annorum 
numero  computata :  cani  autem 
sunt  sensus  hominis." 

Sap.  VI.  7. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Eccli.  XXV.  12. 

"Beatus,  qui  invenit  amicum 
verum,  et  qui  enarrat  justitiam 
auri  audienti." 


Sap.  VI.  7. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Sap.  I.  6. 

"Benignus  est  enim  spiritus 
sapientiae,  et  non  liberabit  male- 
dicum  a  labiis  suis,  quoniam 
renum  illius  testis  est  Deus,  et 
cordis  illius  scrutator  est  verus, 
et  linguae  ejus  auditor." 


Ibid.  Lib.  III.  Cap.  XII. Vers.  9. 

"Unde  in  Sapientia  quae  Salo- 
monis  inscribitur  (si  cui  tamen 
placet  librum  recipere)  scriptum 
reperimus  :  '  Creavit  ut  essent 
omnia,  et  salutares  generationes 
mundi,  et  non  erit  eis  venenum 
mortiferum.'  " 

Ibid. 

"  Et  in  supradicto  volumine 
continetur  :  '  Quae  in  coelo  sunt 
quis  investigabit  ?  nisi  quod  tu 
dedisti  sapientiam,  et  Spiritum 
Sanctum  misisti  de  excelsis,  et 
sic  correctae  sunt  semitae  eorum 
qui  versantur  in  terra ;  et  quae 
tibi  placent  eruditi  sunt  homi- 
nes.' " 

Ibid.  Cap.  XIV.  Vers.  9. 

"  — de  quo  scriptum  est :  '  Cani 
hominis  sapientia  ejus.'  " 


Comment,  in  Malach.  Cap.  II. 
Vers.  I,  2. 


Ibid.  Cap.  III.  Vers.  7  seqq. 

"  —  et  consequetur  illud  de 
quo  scriptum  est:  '  Beatus  qui  in 
aures  loquitur  audientium.'  " 

Comment,    in    Evang,    Math. 
Lib.  I.  Cap.  V.  Vers.  13. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  Cap.  VI.  Vers.  7. 

"  Deus  enim  non  verborum  sed 
cordis  auditor  est." 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 


215 


Judith  V. 

*Tob.  IV.  1 6. 

"  Quod  ab  alio  oderis  fieri  tibi, 
vide,  ne  tu  aliquando  alteri  fa- 
cias." 

Sap.  XII.  I. 

"0  quam  bonus  et  suavis  est, 
Domine,  spiritus  tuus  in  omni- 
bus." 

11.  Maccab.  VI.  et  VII.  Pas- 
sim. 


Sap.  XI.  25. 

"  Diligis  enim  omnia  quae  sunt, 
et  nihil  odisti  eorum  quae  f  ecisti : 
nee  enim  odiens  aliquid  consti- 
tuisti,  aut  fecisti." 

Sap.  IX.  15. 

"  —  corpus  enim,  quod  cor- 
rumpitur,  aggravat  animam,  et 
terrena  inhabitatio  deprimit  sen- 
sum  multa  cogitantem." 

Eccli.  XXVII.  12. 

"Homo  sanctus  in  sapientia 
manet  sicut  sol  ;  nam  stultus 
sicut  luna  mutatur." 

Sap.  VI.  7. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Sap.  I.  II. 

"  Custodite  ergo  vos  a  murmu- 
ratione,  quae  nihil  prodest,  et  a 
detractione  parcite  linguae,  quo- 
niam  sermo  obscurus  in  vacuum 
non  ibit :  os  autem,  quod  menti- 
tur,  occidit  animam." 


Ibid.  Cap.  VIII.  Vers.  18. 

Ibid.    Lib.    III.    Cap.    XXI. 

Vers.  28. 
"  —  hoc  est :  '  Quod  tibi  non 
vis  fieri,  alteri  ne  feceris.*  " 

Comment,  in  Epist.  ad  Galatas 
Lib.  I.  Cap.  III.  2. 

"  —  de  quo  (Spiritu  Sancto) 
alibi  scribitur  :  '  Incorruptus  Spi- 
ritus est  in  omnibus.'  " 

Ibid.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  III.  14. 

"  Eleazarus  quoque  nonagena- 
rius  sub  Antiocho  rege  Syriae, 
et  cum  septem  filiis  gloriosa 
mater,  utrum  maledictos  eos 
aestimaturi  fuerint,  an  omni  laude 
dignissimos  ? " 

Comment,  in  Epist.  ad  Ephe- 
sios  Lib.  I.  Cap.  I.  6. 

"  Dicitur  quippe  ad  Deum  : 
'  Diligis  omnia,  et  nihil  abjicis 
eorum  quae  fecisti.  Neque  enim 
odio  quid  habens  condidisti.*  " 

Ibid.  Lib.  II.  Cap.  IV.  2. 

"  Corruptibile  enim  corpus  ag- 
gravat animam,  et  terrenum  hoc 
tabernaculum  sensum  opprimit 
multa  curantem.'  " 

Ibid.  4. 

"  —  neque  in  morem  stulti 
quasi  luna  mutetur." 

Ibid.  Lib.  III.  Cap.  V.  30. 

Breviarium  in  Psalmos,  Ps.  IV. 
**  Os  enim  quod  mentitur  occi- 
dit animam." 


216 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  IV.  CENTURY. 


Sap.  VII.  27. 

"  Et  cum  sit  una,  omnia  potest, 
et  in  se  permanens  omnia  inno- 
vat,  et  per  nationes  in  animas 
sanctas  se  transfert ;  amicos  Dei 
et  prophetas  constituit." 

Eccli.  I.  16. 

"  Initium  sapientiae,  timor  Do- 
mini, etc." 

Maccab.  Passim. 


Eccli.  XXVII.  12. 

"  Homo  sanctus  in  sapientia 
manet  sicut  sol ;  nam  stultus 
sicut  luna  mutatur." 

Eccli.  XIV.  18. 

"  Omnis  caro  sicut  foenum  ve- 
terascet,  et  sicut  folium  fructifi- 
cans  in  arbore  viridi." 

Eccli.  X.  9. 

"  Avaro  autem  nihil  est  sceles- 
tius.  Quid  superbit  terra  et 
cinis  ?" 

Eccli.  III.  17. 

"  —  et  in  justitia  aedificatur 
tibi,  et  in  die  tribulationis  com- 
memorabitur  tui,  et  sicut  in 
sereno  glacies  solventur  peccata 
tua." 

Sap.  I.  II. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Sap.  VIII.  2. 

"  Hanc  amavi,  et  exquisivi  a 
juventute  mea,  et  quaesivi  spon- 
sam  mihi  eam  assumere,  et  ama- 
tor  f actus  sum  formae  illius." 


Ibid.  Ps.  IX. 

"  Et  alibi  (ipse  Deus  ait):  An- 
ima  justi  sedes  sapientiae." 


Ibid.  Ps.  XXXIII. 
"  Ut   illud  :    *  Initium  sapien- 
tiae, timor  Domini.*" 

Ibid. 

"  Filii  Maccabaeorum  vel  modo 
unusquisque  sanctus  clamave- 
runt,  et  illos  et  modo  unumquem- 
que  ex  omnibus  tribulationibus 
liberat." 

Ibid.  Ps.  LXVII. 

"  Insipiens  enim  sicut  luna 
mutatur." 

Ibid.  Ps.  LXXXIII. 

"  Ilia  autem  caro  de  qua  dici- 
tur :  Omnis  caro  foenum,  non 
desiderat  Dominum." 

Ibid.  Ps.  CXII. 

"  Quia  de  terra  et  putredine 
peccatorum  nostrorum  erexit  nos, 
ut  illud  :  '  Quid  superbis,  pulvis 
et  terra  ? '  —  fiat  nobis  illud 
quod  scriptum  est :  *  Sicut  gla- 
cies in  sereno  solvuntur  peccata 
tua." 


Ibid.  Ps.  CXIX. 

"  — nostras  interficimus  ani- 
mas quod  mentimur  :  *  Os  enim 
quod  mentitur  occidit  animam." 

Liber  De  Expositione  Psalmo- 
rum,  Ps.  CXXVII. 

"Dicit  Salomon  quia  voluerit 
sapientiam  ducere  scilicet  spon- 
sam." 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   IV.   CENTURY.  217 

These  are  the  quotations  which  a  cursory  examination  of 
Jerome's  works  reveals.  We  see  in  them  that  he  quoted  with 
great  frequency  the  deuterocanonical  books  as  divine  Scrip- 
ture. 

Three  causes  are  usually  assigned  for  the  doubts  that  pre- 
vailed among  some  Fathers  concerning  the  deuterocanonical 
books. 

1st, — Disputations  between  Jew  and  Christian  were  fre- 
quent in  those  days.  The  chief  intellectual  adversaries  of 
the  Church  during  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries,  were  Jews, 
and  the  works  of  the  Fathers  of  this  period  are  filled  with  re- 
futations of  their  attacks.  As  the  Jews  rejected  the  deutero- 
canonical books,  the  Fathers  were  obliged  to  draw  Scriptural 
materials  from  the  protocanonical  writings.  Hence,  gradually 
these  were  preferred  in  authority  to  the  deuterocanonical 
books  ;  and,  as  they  furnished  all  that  was  needed  from  a  source 
accepted  by  both  sides,  the  deuterocanonical  works  were  often 
given  a  secondary  place,  and  sometimes  left  out  altogether. 

2. — A  second  cause  is  found  in  Origen's  critical  edition  of  the 
Hexapla.  In  this  work,  which  we  shall  describe  more  fully  in 
the  progress  of  this  work,  Origen  compared  the  Septuagint 
text  with  the  Hebrew  and  other  Greek  texts,  then  existing, 
marking  the  passages  which  were  in  the  Septuagint,  and  not 
found  in  the  Hebrew  by  an  6/3€\o<;.  Copies  made  from  this  text, 
reproducing  the  diacritic  points,  soon  filled  the  East.  Now  the 
Alexandrian  grammarians  were  wont  to  use  the  6/8e\o9,  to 
denote  a  spurious  passage.  Origen's  intention  was  evidently 
not  to  brand  these  books  and  fragments  as  spurious,  but  the 
error  arose  in  the  East  especially  to  distrust  what  was  denoted 
by  this  sign. 

3. — Finally,  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries  were  an  age 
fertile  in  heresies,  apocryphal  productions,  absurd  fables, 
and  fictitious  revelations,  and  in  their  caution  against  what 
was  spurious,  the  Fathers  sometimes  erred  in  slowness  to  re- 
ceive those  books  which  have  in  their  favor  all  the  evidence  that 
is  necessary,  and  that  we  have  a  right  to  expect.  It  was  by  them 
judged  safer  to  refuse  the  quality  of  Canonicity  to  an  inspired 
book,  than,  by  excessive  credulity,  to  approve  an  Apocryphal 
work.  These  causes  operated  principally  in  the  East,  and 
thence  the  most  of  the  opposition  came.  The  growth  of  the 
status  of  the  deuterocanonical  books  might  be  compared  to 
that  of  a  healthy  tree.  It  lost  now  and  then  a  branch,  in 
whose  stead,  it  acquired  new  ones,  and  kept  on  growing  till  it 
filled  the  whole  world,  and  now  enjoys  a  firm  unshaken  hold 


218         THE  CANON  OF  THE  VI.  CENTURY. 

on  all  those  who  hold  to  the  Church  of  Christ.  It  did  this  be- 
cause there  was  in  it  a  divine  vigor,  which  came  not  from  the 
branches,  nor  was  impaired  by  their  occasional  dropping  off. 
There  never  was  any  conflict  between  the  Fathers  on  this 
point,  for  in  practice,  they  were  a  unit.  The  lists  they  drew  up 
were  mere  disciplinary  opinions,  which  never  entered  to  change 
their  practical  use  of  the  Scripture. 

We  find  at  first  the  most  doubt  in  the  East.  This  line  of 
thought  was  brought  into  the  West  by  Jerome  ;  and  while  the 
doubt  gradually  passed  away  in  the  East,  we  find  the  influence 
of  Jerome,  in  the  subsequent  centuries,  engendering  some 
doubts  in  the  minds  of  Fathers  and  theologians  of  the  Western 
Catholic  world.  We  shall  pass  in  brief  review  the  centuries 
from  the  fifth  down  to  the  Council  of  Trent. 

Chapter  X. 

The  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament  from  the  End  of 

THE  Fifth  Century  to  the  End  of  the 

Twelfth  Century. 

The  Hexaplar  version  of  Syriac  Scriptures  made  by  Paul 
of  Telia,  in  6i6,  contains  all  the  deuterocanonical  works. 

DiONYSIUS,  surnamed  the  little,  approved  the  catalogue  of 
Scriptures  promulgated  by  the  Council  of  Carthage  in  419, 
which  embraced  all  the  deuterocanonical  works.* 

Cassiodorus,  writing  for  his  monks  a  sort  of  introduction  to 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  sets  forth  three  catalogues  of  Holy  Books.f 

*Dionysius,  surnamed  the  little,  on  account  of  his  low  stature,  was  a 
native  of  Scythia.  He  came  to  Rome,  and  was  abbot  of  a  monastery  in  that 
city.  He  was  the  inventor  of  the  mode  of  reckoning  the  years  of  the 
Christian  era  since  the  birth  of  Christ,  which  method  is  erroneous  by  several 
years.  He  is  the  author  of  a  "Codex  Canonum"  and  other  minor  works. 
His  death  is  placed  about  the  year  540,  in  the  reign  of  Justinian. 

fFlavius  Magnus  Aurelius  Cassiodorus  Senator  belonged  to  a  family 
most  probably  of  Syrian  origin,  who  were  established  at  Scylaceum  in 
Bruttium  in  the  fifth  century.  His  father  was  administrator  of  Sicily  in 
489,  when  Theodoric  took  Italy,  and  he  filled  high  positions  under  Theodoric. 
Cassiodorus  was  bom  about  490  or  perhaps  a  little  later.  He  filled  important 
public  olfices  under  the  Gothic  sovereigns,  Theodoric  Athalaric,  Theodahat 
and  Witiges.  About  the  year  537,  Cassiodorus  renounced  his  public  charges 
and  retired  to  the  Monasterium  Vivariense,  founded  by  himself  at  Scylaceum, 
where  he  devoted  his  life  to  study  and  prayer.  His  death  is  placed  about  the 
year  583.  He  was  a  prolific  writer.  He  devoted  much  time  to  Scriptural 
studies,  and  gave  thought  that  the  monks  of  Vivarium  should  have  good  texts 
of  Scripture.  The  monastery  possessed  an  excellent  library  and  many  choice 
manuscripts.  Many  excellent  manuscript  texts  of  the  Vulgate  of  Jerome  were 
copied  by  the  monks  of  Cassiodorus  and  spread  through  the  world. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  VI.  CENTURY.         219 

The  first  list  is  that  of  Prologus  Galeatus,  the  helmeted  pro- 
logue of  Jerome.  The  second  list  is  the  Canon  of  St.  Augus- 
tine from  his  Doctrine  Christiana,  which  we  have  already  re- 
produced in  full.  This  third  list  of  Cassiodorus  is  identical 
with  the  catalogue  of  the  Vulgate,  except  a  slight  variation  in 
the  order  of  the  books. 

Cassiodorus  was  more  reverential  than  critical.  He  plainly 
received  all  the  deuterocanonical  books,  and  failed  to  see  any 
repudiation  of  them  in  the  celebrated  Prologue  of  Jerome. 
He  certainly  can  be  claimed  as  a  witness  of  a  tradition  in  the 
sixth  century,  which  accorded  to  the  deuterocanonical  books 
the  quality  of  divinity. 

It  is  evident  that,  in  the  East,  in  the  sixth  and  seventh 
centuries,  the  deuterocanonical  books  were  held  to  be  canoni- 
ical,  since  the  schismatic  churches  of  the  Chaldean  Nesto- 
rians,  the  Jacobite  Monophysites,  Syrians,  Ethiopians,  Ar- 
menians and  Copts,  all  have  the  deuterocanonical  Scriptures 
in  equal  place  with  the  other  divine  books.* 

It  is  needless  to  attend  to  the  absurd  catalogue  of  Junilius 
Africanus,  an  obscure  bishop  of  Africa  in  the  sixth 
century.  This  list  places  Chronicles,  Job,  and  Ezra  with 
Tobias,  Judith,  Esther,  and  Maccabees  among  the  non-canoni- 
cal books.f 

His  opinion  represents  the  tradition  of  no  church  or  sect, 
nor  is  it  found  in  any  writer  of  note,  and  is  rejected  by  every- 
body. 

An  unfavorable  testimony  is  found  in  the  work  "  De  Sectis  " 
of  Leontius  of  Byzantium,  a  priest  of  Constantinople  in  the 
sixth  century.  He  drew  up  a  Canon  of  only  the  protocanonical 
books  excepting  Esther,  and  declared  that,  "  these  are  the  books 
which  are  held  Canonical  in  the  Church."  Leontius  lived  many 
years  in  the  monastery  of  St.  Saba,  near  Jerusalem,  and  the 
ideas  of  the  Church  of  Jerusalem  are  reflected  in  his  works.  It 
can  be  said  of  him,  as  of  Cyrill  that  exclusion  from  canonicity 
was  not  with  him  exclusion  from  divinity.  With  them  the 
divine  books  of  the  Old  Testament  were  arranged  in  two 
classes  canonical  and  non- canonical.  They  used  the  latter  as 
divine  Scripture  without  according  it  the  preeminence  of 
canonicity.  Leontius  used  in  several  places  quotations  from 
deuterocanonical  works  as  divine  Scripture. 


*Assemann,  Bibliotheca  Orientalis,  III. 


f  Junil.  Afric.  De  part.  div.  Legis  I.  3-7.    Migne  68,  16  et  seqq. 


220         THE  CANON  OF  THE  VI.  CENTURY. 

The  opponents  of  our  Thesis  cite  at  this  juncture  St. 
Gregory  the  Great.* 

In  the  Moral  Treatises  XIX.  21,  citing  a  passage  from 
Maccabees,  he  prefaces  the  citation  by  saying :  "  We  shall  not 
act  rashly,  if  we  accept  a  testimony  of  books,  which,  although 
not  canonical,  have  been  published  for  the  edification  of  the 
Church." 

In  the  phraseology  of  St.  Gregory,  canonical  signified  some- 
thing over  and  above  divine.  It  signified  those  books  con- 
cerning which  the  whole  world,  with  one  accord,  united  in  pro- 
claiming the  word  of  God.  The  other  books  were  divine,  were 
used  as  sources  of  divine  teaching  by  the  Church,  but  there 
was  lacking  the  authoritative  decree  of  the  Church  making  them 
equal  to  the  former  in  rank.  The  Jews  of  old  made  such  dis- 
tinction regarding  the  Law  and  the  Hagiographa.  All  came 
from  God,  but  the  Law  was  preeminent.  The  influence  of  St. 
Jerome  was  strong  upon  St.  Gregory.  The  tradition  of  the 
Church  drew  him  with  it  to  use  freely,  as  divine  Scripture,  the 
deuterocanonical  books ;  while  the  doubts  of  Jerome  moved 
him  to  hesitate  in  his  critical  opinion  to  accord  to  these  books 
a  prerogative  of  which  Jerome  doubted.  Had  the  Church  not 
settled  the  issue  in  the  Council  of  Trent,  there  would,  doubt- 
less, be  many  Catholics  yet  who  would  refuse  to  make  equal 
the  books  of  the  first  and  second  Canons.  Christ  established 
a  Church  to  step  in  and  regulate  Catholic  thought  at  opportune 
times,  and  her  aid  was  needed  in  settling,  once  for  all,  the  dis- 
cussion of  the  Canon  of  Scripture.  This  isolated  doubt  from 
St.  Gregory  reflects  merely  a  critical  opinion,  biased  by  Greg- 
ory's esteem  for  St.  Jerome.     To  show  what  was  St.  Gregory's 

*St.  Gregory,  surnamed  the  Great,  was  born  of  an  illustrious  Roman 
family,  and  was  pretor  of  Rome  in  573.  Despising  the  inanity  of  worldly 
grandeur,  he  retired  into  a  monastery  which  he  had  built  under  the  patron- 
age of  St.  Andrew.  Pope  Pelagius  II.  drew  him  from  his  retreat  and  made 
him  one  of  the  seven  deacons  of  Rome.  He  then  sent  him  as  Nuncio  to  Con- 
stantinople, to  implore  the  succour  of  Tiberius  II.  against  the  Lombards.  At 
his  return,  he  was  made  secretary  to  Pelagius,  after  Pelagius'  death,  by  unani- 
mous consent  of  people  and  clergy,  he  was  created  Pope.  He  strove  to 
avoid  the  papal  dignity,  but  in  vain;  he  was  created  Pope  in  590.  His  reign 
was  characterized  by  great  ability  and  holiness.  He  by  divine  aid,  checked  a 
pestilence  that  ravaged  Rome,  extinguished  the  schism  of  the  Three  Chapters; 
evangelized  England  through  means  of  St.  Austin,  reformed  the  divine  office, 
reformed  the  clergy,  checked  the  ambition  of  the  Patriarchs  of  Constantinople, 
and  upheld  the  rights  of  the  Holy  See.  Gregory  died  in  604.  His  principal 
writings  are  his  Moral  Treatises,  his  Dialogues,  and  exegetical  Treatises  on 
Holy  Scripture.  He  had  more  piety  than  learning,  and  his  exegesis  is  excess- 
ively mystic. 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   VI.   CENTURY. 


221 


opinion  as  witness  of  tradition,  we  have  excerpted  the  follow- 
ing deuterocanonical  quotations  from  the  English  edition  of 
some  of  Gregory's  works,  published  by  members  of  the  English 
Church  at  Oxford,  in  1844: 


Eccli.  II.  14. 

"Wo  to  them  that  are  of  a 
double  heart,  and  to  wicked  lips, 
and  to  the  hands  that  do  evil, 
and  to  the  sinner  that  goeth  on 
the  earth  two  ways." 

Eccli.  II.  16. 

"  Wo  to  them,  that  have  lost 
patience,  and  that  have  forsaken 
the  right  ways,  and  have  gOtae 
aside  into  crooked  ways." 

Sap.  I.  7. 

"For  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord 
hath  filled  the  whole  world  :  and 
that,  which  containeth  all  things, 
hath  knowledge  of  the  voice." 

EccH.  XXIV.  8. 

"  I  alone  have  compassed  the 
circuit  of  heaven,  etc." 


Eccli.  XXXII.  26. 

"  And  beware  of  thy  own  chil- 
dren, and  take  heed  of  them  of 
thy  household." 


Eccli.  XI.  27. 

"  In  the  day  of  good  things  be 
not  unmindful  of  evils  ;  and  in 
the  day  of  evils  be  not  unmind- 
ful of  good  things." 

Sap.  XII.  15. 

"  For  so  much  then  as  thou 
art  just,  thou  orderest  all  things 
justly  :  thinking  it  not  agreeable 


Com.  on  Job.  Bk.  I.  36. 

"  Hence  it  is  well  said  by  a 
certain  wise  man  :  *  Woe  to  the 
sinner  that  goeth  two  ways.'  " 


Ibid.  55. 

"  For  it  is  hence  that  it  is  said 
of  the  reprobate:  '  Woe  unto  you 
that  have  lost  patience.'  " 

Ibid.  Bk.  II.  20. 

"  Hence  it  is  written  concern- 
ing His  Spirit:  '  For  the  Spirit  of 
the  Lord  filleth  the  world.'  " 

Ibid. 

"  Hence  it  is  that  His  Wisdom 
saith :  *  I  alone  compassed  the 
circuit  of  heaven,'  " 

Ibid.  Bk.  III.  13. 

"  For  hence  it  is  written  :  *  Be- 
ware of  thine  own  children,  and 
take  heed  to  thyself  from  thy 
servants.' " 

Ibid.  16. 

"  For  it  is  hence  written  :  *  In 
the  day  of  prosperity  be  not  un- 
mindful of  affliction,  and  in  the 
day  of  affliction  be  not  unmind- 
ful of  prosperity.'  " 

Ibid.  26. 

"  It  is  hence  that  a  Wise  Man 
saith  to  the  Father  :  '  Forasmuch 
then  as  Thou  art  righteous  Thy- 


222 


THE  CANON   OF   THE   VI.   CENTURY. 


to  thy  power,  to  condemn  him, 
who  deserveth  not  to  be  pun- 
ished." 


Eccli.  IV.  24, 

"  For  there  is  a  shame  that 
bringeth  sin,  and  there  is  a  shame 
that  bringeth  glory  and  grace." 

Eccli.  XXI.  I. 

"  My  son,  hast  thou  sinned  ? 
do  so  no  more :  but  for  thy 
former  sins  also  pray  that  they 
may  be  forgiven  thee." 

Eccli.  II.  I. 

"Son,  when  thou  comest  to 
the  service  of  God,  stand  in  jus- 
tice, and  in  fear,  and  prepare  thy 
soul  for  temptation." 


Eccli.  I.  33. 

"Son,  if  thou  desire  wisdom, 
keep  justice,  and  God  will  give 
her  to  thee." 

Sap.  IX.  15. 

"  For  the  corruptible  body  is 
a  load  upon  the  soul,  and  the 
earthly  habitation  presseth  down 
the  mind  that  museth  upon  many 
things." 

Sap.  IX.  16. 

"And  hardly  do  we  guess 
aright  at  things  that  are  upon 
earth :  and  with  labour  do  we 
find  the  things  that  are  before 
us.  But  the  things  that  are  in 
heaven,  who  shall  search  out  ? " 


self,  Thou  orderest  all  things 
righteously ;  Thou  condemnest 
Him  too  that  deserveth  not  to  be 
punished.'  "* 

Comment,  on  Job,  Bk.  IV.  32. 

"  Of  which  it  is  said  by  one : 
'  There  is  a  shame  which  is  glory 
and  grace.'  " 

Ibid.  39. 

"  And  against  this  it  is  rightly 
said  by  one  :  *  My  son,  hast  thou 
sinned  ?  add  not  again  thereto.'  " 

Ibid.  42. 

"  For  so  it  is  written  :  '  My 
son,  if  thou  come  to  serve  the 
Lord,  stand  in  righteousness  and 
in  fear,  and  prepare  thy  soul  for 
temptation.'  " 

Ibid.  61. 


Ibid.  68. 

"  For  it  is  written  :  '  For  the 
corruptible  body  presseth  down 
the  soul,  and  the  earthly  taber- 
nacle weigheth  down  the  mind 
that  museth  upon  many  things.'  " 

Ibid.  Bk.  V.  12. 

"  That  wise  man  had  seen  him- 
self to  be  encompassed  with 
darkness,  when  he  said  :  '  And 
with  labour  do  we  find  the  things 
that  are  before  us;  but  the  things 
that  are  in  heaven  who  shall 
search  out  ?'  " 


♦Gregory  has  here  followed  a  reading  different  from  that  of  the  Vulgate, 
but  it  is  not  a  question  of  his  critical  handling  of  texts,  but  of  his  approba- 
tion of  Wisdom ;  and  this,  the  present  reading  evidences. 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   VI.   CENTURY. 


223 


Sap.  IV.  II. 

"  He  was  taken  away  lest  wick- 
edness should  alter  his  under- 
standing, or  deceit  beguile  his 
soul." 


Eccli.  V.  4. 

"  Say  not :  I  have  sinned,  and 
what  harm  hath  befallen  me  ? 
for  the  most  High  is  a  patient 
rewarder." 

Sap,  IX.  15. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Sap.  VII.  26. 

"  For  she  is  the  brightness  of 
eternal  light,  and  the  unspotted 
mirror  of  God's  Majesty,  and  the 
image  of  his  goodness." 

Sap.  XII.  18. 

"But  thou  being  master  of 
power,  judgest  with  tranquility, 
etc." 

Sap.  II.  24. 

"  But  by  the  envy  of  the  devil, 
death  came  into  the  world." 


Sap.  V.  21. 

"  And  he  will  sharpen  his 
severe  wrath  for  a  spear,  and  the 
whole  world  shall  fight  with  him 
against  the  unwise." 


Ibid.  34. 

"If  God  in  His  providential 
dealings  did  not  carry  off  the 
righteous.  Wisdom  would  never 
have  said  of  the  righteous  man  : 
'Yea,  speedily  was  he  taken 
away,  lest  that  wickedness  should 
alter  his  understanding.'  " 

Ibid.  35. 

"  For  because,  as  it  is  written, 
'  For  the  Lord  is  a  long-suffering 
rewarder.'  " 

Ibid.  58. 

"  And  because  in  this  life, 
whatever  degree  of  virtue  a  man 
may  have  advanced  to,  he  still 
feels  the  sting  of  corruption,  'For 
the  corruptible  body  presseth 
down  the  soul,  and  the  earthy 
tabernacle  weigheth  down  the 
mind  that  museth  upon  many 
things.'  " 

Ibid.  64. 

"  And  as  the  Wise  Man,  in  the 
setting  forth  of  Wisdom,  saith 
concerning  the  same  Son  :  '  For 
She  is  the  brightness  of  the  ever- 
lasting light.'  " 

Ibid.  78. 

"  — since  it  is  written  :  '  But 
Thou,  Lord,  judgest  with  tran- 
quility.' " 

Ibid.  85. 

"  Of  whom  also  it  is  written  : 
*  Nevertheless,  through  envy  of 
the  devil  came  death  into  the 
world.'  " 

Ibid.  Bk.  VL  14. 

"The  wise  man  testifies  con- 
cerning God  :  'And  the  world 
shall  fight  with  Him  against  the 
unwise.'  " 


2^ 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   VI.    CENTURY. 


Sap.  XVI.  20. 

"  Instead  of  which  things  thou 
didst  feed  thy  people  with  the 
food  of  Angels,  and  gavest  them 
bread  from  heaven  prepared  with- 
out labour,  having  in  it  all  that 
is  delicious,  and  the  sweetness  of 
every  taste. 

Tobias  IV.  16. 

**  See  thou  never  do  to  another 
what  thou  wouldst  hate  to  have 
done  to  thee  by  another." 

Eccli.  XII.  8. 

"  A  friend  shall  not  be  known 
in  prosperity,  and  an  enemy  shall 
not  be  hidden  in  adversity." 


Eccli.  II.  16. 

"  Woe  to  them,  that  have  lost 
patience,  and  that  have  forsaken 
the  right  ways,  and  have  gone 
aside  into  crooked  ways. 

Sap.  XI.  24. 

'*  But  thou  hast  mercy  upon 
all,  because  thou  canst  do  all 
things,  and  winkest  at  the  sins  of 
men  for  the  sake  of  repentance." 

Sap.  IX.  15. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Eccli.  XXXIV.  7. 

"  For  dreams  have  deceived 
many,  and  they  have  failed  that 
put  their  trust  in  them." 


Ibid.  22. 

"  Hence  it  is  said  by  the  wise 
man  of  the  sweetness  of  manna  : 
'Thou  didst  send  them  from 
heaven  bread  prepared  without 
their  labour,  having  in  itself  all 
delight,  and  the  sweetness  of 
every  taste.'" 

Ibid.  54. 

"  Hence  the  wise  man  saith  : 
*  Do  not  that  to  any  which  thou 
wouldst  not  have  done  to  thy- 
self.' " 

Ibid.  Bk.  VII.  29. 

"Whence  a  certain  wise  man 
saith  rightly  :  '  A  friend  cannot 
be  known  in  prosperity  ;  and  an 
enemy  cannot  be  hidden  in  ad- 
versity.' " 

Ibid.  45. 

"  Hence  it  is  that  it  was  spoken 
by  one  that  was  wise:  '  Woe  unto 
you  that  have  lost  patience.'  " 

Ibid.  Bk.  VIII.  31. 

"  — as  it  is  written:  'And  wink- 
est at  the  sins  of  men  for  their 
repentance.' " 

Ibid.  12. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  42. 

"  For  except  dreams  were  very 
frequently  caused  to  come  in  il- 
lusion by  our  secret  enemy,  the 
wise  man  would  never  have 
pointed  this  out  by  saying:  'For 
dreams  and  vain  illusions  have 
deceived  many.'  " 


Sap.  IX.  15. 

(Oft  quoted.) 


Ibid.  50. 


(Oft  quoted.) 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   VI.   CENTURY. 


225 


Eccli.  XL.  I. 

"  Great  labour  is  created  for 
all  men,  and  a  heavy  yoke  is 
upon  the  children  of  Adam,  from 
the  day  of  their  coming  out  of 
their  mother's  womb,  until  the 
day  of  their  burial  into  the  mother 
of  all." 

Sap.  V.  6. 

"  Therefore  we  have  erred 
from  the  way  of  truth,  and  the 
light  of  justice  hath  not  shined 
unto  us,  and  the  sun  of  under- 
standing hath  not  risen  upon 
us." 


Eccli.  I.  13. 

"With  him  that  feareth  the 
Lord  it  shall  go  well  in  the  latter 
end,  and  in  the  day  of  his  death 
he  shall  be  blessed." 

Sap.  II.  12. 

"Let  us  therefore  lie  in  wait  for 
the  just,  because  he  is  not  for  our 
turn,  and  he  is  contrary  to  our 
doings,  and  upbraideth  us  with 
transgressions  of  the  law,  and  di- 
vulgeth  against  us  the  sins  of  our 
way  of  life." 

Eccli.  VII.  40. 

"  In  all  thy  works  remember 
thy  last  end,  and  thou  shalt 
never  sin." 

Sap.  VI.  7  et  9. 

"  For  to  him  that  is  little, 
mercy  is  granted  :  but  the  mighty 
shall  be  mightily  tormented.  But 
a  greater  punishment  is  ready 
for  the  more  mighty." 
o 


Ibid.  55. 

"  The  burthens  of  which  state 
of  infirmity  that  wise  man  rightly 
regarding,  exclaims  :  '  A  heavy 
yoke  is  upon  the  sons  of  Adam, 
from  the  day  that  they  go  out  of 
their  mother's  womb  till  the  day 
that  they  return  to  the  mother  of 
all  things.'  " 

Ibid.  76. 

"  And  as  the  ungodly  that  are 
cast  away  in  the  Judgment,  are 
described  in  the  book  of  Wisdom 
as  saying  :  '  We  have  erred  from 
the  way  of  truth,  and  the  light 
of  righteousness  hath  not  shined 
unto  us,  and  the  sun  rose  not 
upon  us.' " 

Ibid.  88. 

"  Of    this   it    is    said    again : 

*  Whoso  feareth  the  Lord,  it  shall 
go  well  with  him  at  the  last.'  " 

Ibid.  Bk.  IX.  89. 

"  And  the  sons  of  perdition  in 
their  persecutions  say  concern- 
ing that  same  Redeemer  :  '  And 
He  is  clean  contrary  to  our 
doings  ' ;  and  soon  afterwards  : 

*  For  His  life  is  not  like  other 
men  s. 

Ibid.  92. 

"  Hence  again  it  is  written  : 
'  Whatsoever  thou  takest  in  hand, 
remember  thine  end,  and  thou 
shalt  never  do  amiss.*  " 

Ibid.  98. 

"  For  hence  it  is  written:  '  But 
mighty  men  shall  be  mightily 
tormented,  and  stronger  torment 
shall  come  upon  the  stronger 
ones.'  " 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  VI.   CENTURY. 


Tob.  IV.  1 6. 

**  See  thou  never  do  to  another 
what  thou  wouldst  hate  to  have 
done  to  thee  by  another." 


Eccli.  VII.  15. 

"  Be  not  full  of  words  in  a  mul- 
tude  of  ancients,  and  repeat  not 
the  word  in  thy  prayer." 

Eccli.  I.  13. 

"With  him  that  feareth  the 
Lord  it  shall  go  well  in  the  latter 
end,  and  in  the  day  of  his  death 
he  shall  be  blessed." 

Eccli.  XXXIV.  2. 

"  The  man  that  giveth  heed  to 
lying  visions,  is  like  him  that 
catcheth  at  a  shadow  and  fol- 
loweth  after  the  wind." 

Sap.  III.  2. 

"In  the  sight  of  the  unwise 
they  seemed  to  die  :  and  their 
departure  was  taken  for  misery." 


Sap.  XII.  18. 

"But  thou,  being  master  of 
power,  judgest  with  tranquility, 
and  with  great  favour  disposest 
of  us  :  for  thy  power  is  at  hand 
when  thou  wilt." 

Sap.  XVII.  10. 

"  For  whereas  wickedness  is 
fearful,  it  beareth  witness  of  its 
condemnation :  for  a  troubled 
conscience  always  forecasteth 
grievous  things." 


Ibid.  Bk.  X.  8. 

"And  the  love  of  our  neigh- 
bour is  carried  down  into  two 
precepts,  since,  on  the  one  hand, 
it  is  said  by  a  certain  righteous 
man:  '  Do  that  to  no  man  which 
thou  hatest.'  " 

Ibid.  28. 

"  For  we  should  call  to  mind 
what  is  said :  '  Do  not  repeat  a 
word  in  thy  prayer.'  " 

Ibid.  35. 

"  Hence  it  is  written:  '  Whoso 
feareth  the  Lord,  it  shall  go  well 
with  him  at  the  last.'  " 

Ibid.  Bk.  XI.  68. 

"  Hence  it  is  well  written  con- 
cerning him,  'that  he  hath  fol- 
lowed a  shadow.'  " 

Ibid.  Bk.  XII.  6. 

"  —  that  amidst  the  hands  of 
the  persecutors  his  body  is  be- 
reft of  life  ;  for  according  to  the 
words  of  Wisdom:  *In  the  sight 
of  the  unwise  they  seemed  to 
die,  and  their  departure  is  taken 
for  misery.'  " 

Ibid.  14. 

"  Whence  it  is  said  to  Him  : 
*  But  Thou,  Ruler  of  power, 
judgest  with  tranquillity,  and 
orderest  us  with  exceeding  great 
regard.'  " 

Ibid.  46. 

"  Whence  it  is  written  :  '  For 
whereas  wickedness  is  timorous, 
she  gives  witness  to  condemna- 
tion.' " 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  VI.   CENTURY. 


227 


Eccli.  XI.  27. 

"In  the  day  of  good  things,  be 
not  unmindful  of  evils  :  and  in 
the  day  of  evils,  be  not  unmind- 
ful of  good  things." 

Eccli.  X.  15. 

"  Because  his  heart  is  departed 
from  him  that  made  him ;  for 
pride  is  the  beginning  of  all  sin  : 
he  that  holdeth  it,  shall  be  filled 
with  maledictions,  and  it  shall 
ruin  him  in  the  end." 

Eccli.  XXII.  2. 

"  The  sluggard  is  pelted  with 
the  dung  of  oxen  :  and  every 
one  that  toucheth  him  will  shake 
his  hands." 

Sap.  I.  4. 

"For  wisdom  will  not  enter 
into  a  malicious  soul,  nor  dwell 
in  a  body  subject  to  sins." 

Eccli.  III.  22. 

"  Seek  not  the  things  that  are 
too  high  for  thee,  and  search  not 
into  things  above  thy  ability." 

Sap.  IX.  15. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Eccli.  XXII.  6. 

"A  tale  out  of  time  is  like 
music  in  mourning :  but  the 
stripes  and  instruction  <?/ wisdom 
are  never  out  of  time." 


Sap.  I.  II. 

"  —  and  the  mouth  that   be- 
lieth,  killeth  the  soul." 

Sap.  V.  8—9. 

"What  hath  pride  profited  us  ? 
or  what  advantage  hath  the  boast- 


Ibid.  Bk.  XIII.  48. 

"  — as  when  it  is  written  :  '  In 
the  day  of  prosperity,  be  not  for- 
getful of  affliction,  and  in  the 
day  of  affliction,  be  not  forgetful 
of  prosperity.'  " 

Ibid.  Bk.  XIV.  19. 

"  If  then  sin  is  death, '  the  first- 
born of  death'  may  not  unsuitably 
be  taken  for  pride,  in  that  it  is 
written  :  '  Pride  is  the  beginning 
of  all  sin.'" 

Ibid.  Bk.  XV.  5. 

"Whence  it  is  written:  'A 
slothful  man  is  pelted  with  the 
dung  of  oxen.'  " 

Ibid.  9. 

"  It  is  written  :  '  For  into  a 
malicious  soul  wisdom  shall  not 
enter.' " 

Ibid.  Bk.  XVI.  8. 

"And  again:  'Seek  not  out 
the  things  that  are  too  deep  for 
thee  ;  neither  search  the  things 
that  are  above  thy  strength.'  " 

Ibid.  Bk.  XVII.  39. 
(Already  quoted.) 

Ibid.  Bk.  XVIII.  2. 

"  Since  neither  is  it  allowable 
to  suppose  that  under  infliction 
of  chastenings  he  used  music, 
when  Truth  saith  by  His  Scrip- 
ture :  *  Music  in  mourning  is  as 
a  tale  out  of  season.'  " 

Ibid.  5. 

"  But  seeing  that  it  is  written  : 
*  The  mouth  that  belieth  slayeth 
the  soul.'  " 

Ibid.  29. 

"  Those  also  are  slow  in  *  open- 
ing their  eyes,'  who,  as  Wisdom 


228 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   VI.   CENTURY. 


ing  of  riches  brought  us?  All 
those  things  are  passed  away  like 
a  shadow,  and  like  a  post  that 
runneth  on." 


Eccli.  II.  5. 

"  For  gold  and  silver  are  tried 
in  the  fire;  but  acceptable  men, 
in  the  furnace  of  humiliation." 

Eccli.  XXXVIII.  25. 

"  The  wisdom  of  a  scribe  com- 
eth  by  his  time  of  leisure  :  and 
he  that  is  less  in  action,  shall  re- 
ceive wisdom." 

Sap.  IX.  15. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Eccli.  XV.  3. 

"  With  the  bread  of  life  and 
understanding,  she  shall  feed 
him,  and  give  him  the  water  of 
wholesome  wisdom  to  drink — ." 

Sap.  IV.  8—9. 

"  For  venerable  old  age  is  not 
that  of  long  time,  nor  counted 
by  the  number  of  years  :  but  the 
understanding  of  a  man  is  grey 
hairs,  and  a  spotless  life  is  old 
age. 


I.  Maccab.  VI.  46. 

"  And  he  went  between  the 
feet  of  the  elephant,  and  put 
himself  under  it,  and  slew  it :  and 
it  fell  to  the  ground  upon  him, 
and  he  died  there." 


is  witness,  are  described  as  going 
in  the  time  of  their  condemna- 
tion to  say :  '  What  hath  pride 
profited  us  ?  or  what  good  hath 
riches  with  our  vaunting  brought 
us  ?  All  these  things  are  passed 
away  like  a  shadow,  and  as  a 
post  that  hasteth  by.'  " 

Ibid.  40. 

"  Whence  it  is  written  :  *  For 
gold  is  tried  in  the  fire,  and  ac- 
ceptable men  in  the  furnace  of 
adversity.'" 

Ibid.  68. 

"  And  hence  it  is  said  else- 
where :  *  Write  wisdom  in  the 
time  of  leisure.  And  he  that  is 
lessened  in  doing,  even  he  shall 
win  her.'  " 

Ibid.  71. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  Bk.  XIX.  9. 

"Again,  by  water  sacred 
knowledge  is  denoted,  as  it  is 
said  :  '  And  give  him  the  water 
of  wisdom  to  drink.*  " 

Ibid.  26. 

"But  Holy  Scripture  is  used 
to  call  those  '  elders,'  not  who 
are  ripe  by  amount  of  years 
alone,  but  by  ancientness  of 
character.  Hence  it  was  said  by 
one  that  was  wise  :  '  For  vener- 
able old  age  is  not  that  of  long 
time,  nor  counted  by  the  number 
of  years  ;  but  the  understanding 
of  a  man  is  gray  hairs,  and  a 
spotless  life  is  old  age.'  " 

Ibid.  34. 

"  With  reference  to  which  par- 
ticular we  are  not  acting  irregu- 
larly, if  from  the  books,  though 
not  canonical,  yet  brought  out 
for  the  edifying  of  the  Church, 


THE   CANON   OF  THE  VI.   CENTURY. 


229 


Eccli.  XXX.  24. 
"  Have  pity  on  thy  own  soul, 
pleasing  God,  etc." 

Eccli.  XIV.  5. 

"  He  that  is  evil  to  himself,  to 
whom  will  he  be  good  ?  etc." 


Sap.  XII.  18. 

(Already  quoted.) 


Eccli.  V.  4. 

"  Say  not :  I  have  sinned,  and 
what  harm  hath  befallen  me  ? 
for  the  most  High  is  a  patient 
re  warder." 

Sap.  IX.  15. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Eccli.  II.  II — 12. 

"  My  children,  behold  the  gen- 
erations of  men  :  and  know  ye 
that  no  one  hath  hoped  in  the 
Lord,  and  hath  been  confounded. 
For  who  hath  continued  in  his 
commandment,  and  hath  been 
forsaken?  or  who  hath  called 
upon  him,  and  he  despised  him  ?" 

Eccli.  IV,  18—19. 

"  For  she  walketh  with  him  in 
in  temptation,  and  at  the  first  she 
chooseth  him.  She  will  bring 
upon  him  fear  and  dread  and 
trial :  and  she  will  scourge  him 
with  the  affliction  of  her  dis- 
cipline, till  she  try  him  by  her 
laws,  and  trust  his  soul." 


we  bring  forward  testimony. 
Thus  Eleazar  in  the  battle  smote 
and  brought  down  an  elephant, 
but  fell  under  the  very  beast  that 
he  killed." 

Ibid.  38. 

"  Whence  it  is  written  :  *  Have 
mercy  upon  thine  own  soul  by 
pleasing  God.' " 

Ibid. 

"  Whence  it  is  also  said  by  one 
that  was  wise  :  *  He  that  is  evil 
to  himself,  to  whom  will  he  be 
good  ?' " 

Ibid.  46. 

"  — He,  of  whom  it  is  written  : 

*  But  Thou,  Lord,  judgest  with 
tranquility.' " 

Ibid. 

"  He,  of  whom  it  is  written 
again  :  '  The  Lord  is  a  patient 
rewarder.'  " 

Ibid.  Bk.  XX.  8. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Ibid.  51. 

"And  when  it  is  written  again: 

*  Did  ever  any  trust  in  the  Lord 
and  was  confounded  ?  or  did 
any  abide  in  His  commandments, 
and  was  forsaken  ?  or  whom  did 
He  ever  despise,  that  called  upon 
Him?'" 

Ibid. 

"  Whence  too  it  is  rightly  said 
by  one  of  Wisdom  :  '  For  at  the 
first  she  will  walk  with  him  by 
crooked  ways,  and  bring  fear 
and  dread  upon  him,  and  tor- 
ment him  with  her  discipline  until 
she  try  him  in  his  thoughts.'  " 


230 


THE   CANON   OF  THE  VI.   CENTURY. 


Eccli.  I.  13. 

"With  him  that  feareth  the 
Lord  it  shall  go  well  in  the  latter 
end,  etc." 

Eccli.  XVIII.  15—17. 

"  My  son,  in  thy  good  deeds 
make  no  complaint,  and  when 
thou  givest  anything,  add  not 
grief  by  an  evil  word.  Shall  not 
the  dew  assuage  the  heat  ?  so 
also  the  good  word  is  better  than 
the  gift.  Lo,  is  not  a  word  better 
than  a  gift  ?  but  both  are  with  a 
justified  man." 

Eccli.  XX.  32. 

"  Wisdom  that  is  hid,  and  trea- 
sure that  is  not  seen  :  what  profit 
is  there  in  them  both  ?  " 


Sap.  VII.  15. 

"  And  God  hath  given  to  me 
to  speak  as  I  would,  and  to  con- 
ceive thoughts  worthy  of  those 
things  that  are  given  me :  be- 
cause he  is  the  guide  of  wisdom, 
and  the  director  of  the  wise." 

Eccli.  X.  15. 

"  —  pride  is  the  beginning  of 
all  sin—." 

Sap.  III.  5. 

"Afflicted  in  few  things,  in 
many  they  shall  be  rewarded  : 
because  God  hath  tried  them, 
and  found  them  worthy  of  him- 
self." 

Eccli.  II.  I. 

"Son,  when  thou  comest  to 
the  service  of  God,  stand  in  jus- 
tice, and  in  fear,  and  prepare 
thy  soul  for  temptation." 


Ibid.  56. 

"  As  it  is  written  :  '  To  him 
that  feareth  God  it  shall  go  well 
at  the  last.'  " 

Ibid.  Bk.  XXI.  29. 

"  To  which  persons  it  is  well 
said  by  the  Book  of  Ecclesias- 
ticus  :  '  To  every  gift  give  not 
the  bitterness  of  an  evil  word.' 
And  again  :  '  Lo,  a  word  is  better 
than  a  gift,  and  both  are  with  a 
man  that  is  justified.'  " 


Ibid.  Bk.  XXII.  7. 

"  And  excepting  that  gold  had 
a  something  of  a  like  sort  with 
wisdom,  that  wise  man  would 
never  have  said  :  '  Wisdom  hid- 
den from  sight,  and  a  treasure 
that  is  not  seen,  what  use  is  there 
in  either?' " 

Ibid.  Bk.  XXIII.  31. 

"Whence  a  certain  wise  man 
well  said  :  '  May  God  grant  me 
to  speak  these  things  according 
to  my  sentence.'  " 


Ibid.  44. 

"  And  it  is  written  :  *  Pride  is 
the  beginning  of  all  sin." 

Ibid.  52. 

"It  is  hence  said  of  them  by 
Wisdom:  *  God  proved  them,  and 
found  them  worthy  for  Him- 
self.' " 

Ibid.  Bk.  XXIV.  27. 

"To  keep  security  from  gen- 
erating carelessness,  it  is  written: 
'  My  son,  in  coming  to  the  service 
of  God,  stand  injustice  and  fear, 
and  prepare  thy  soul  for  tempta- 
tion.' " 


THE  CANON   OF  THE  VI.   CENTURY. 


231 


Sap.  III.  7. 

"The  just  shall  shine,  and 
shall  run  to  and  fro  like  sparks 
among  the  reeds." 

Eccli.  XXXII.  I. 

"  Have  they  made  thee  ruler  ? 
be  not  lifted  up  :  be  among  them 
as  one  of  them. 


Sap.  VI.  5. 

"Horribly  and  speedily  will 
he  appear  to  you  :  for  a  most 
severe  judgment  shall  be  for 
them  that  bear  rule." 


Eccli.  V.  4. 

"  Say  not  :  I  have  sinned,  and 
what  harm  hath  befallen  me  ? 
etc." 


Sap.  XIII.  5. 

"  For  by  the  greatness  of  the 
beauty,  and  of  the  creature,  the 
Creator  of  them  may  be  seen,  so 
as  to  be  known  thereby," 

Sap.  VI.  17. 

"  For  she  goeth  about  seeking 
such  as  are  worthy  of  her,  and 
she  sheweth  herself  to  them  cheer- 
fully in  the  ways,  and  meeteth 
them  with  all  providence." 

Eccli.  III.  22. 

(Before  quoted.) 

Sap.  IX.  15. 

(Oft  quoted.) 


Ibid.  49. 

"  — that  it  is  said  by  Wisdom  : 
'The  righteous  shall  shine,  and 
shall  run  to  and  fro  like  sparks 
among  the  reeds.'  " 

Ibid.  52. 

"Against  this  pride  it  is  said 
in  the  Book  Ecclesiasticus  : 
*  Have  they  appointed  thee  a 
ruler  ?  Be  not  lifted  up,  but  be 
among  them  as  one  of  them.'  " 

Ibid.  54. 

"  But  it  is  rightly  said  by  the 
Book  of  Wisdom  of  the  coming 
of  the  strict  Judge  :  *  Horribly 
and  speedily  will  He  appear,  for 
a  very  sharp  judgment  shall  be 
to  them  who  are  in  high  places." 

Ibid.  Bk.  XXV.  6. 

"  To  whom  it  is  said  by  a  cer- 
tain wise  man  :  '  Say  not,  I  have 
sinned,  and  what  harm  hath  hap- 
pened to  me?'  " 

Ibid.  Bk.  XXVI.  17. 

"  Whence  also  it  is  written  in 
the  Book  of  Wisdom  :  '  For  by 
the  greatness  and  beauty  of  the 
creatures  the  Maker  of  them  can 
be  intelligently  seen.'  " 

Ibid. 

"For  hence  it  is  written  of 
Wisdom  :  '  She  sheweth  herself 
cheerfully  unto  them  in  the  ways, 
and  meeteth  them  in  all  fore- 
thought.' " 

Ibid.  27. 

(Before  quoted.) 

Ibid.  Bk.  XXVII.  45. 
(Oft  quoted.) 


232 


THE   CANON   OF   THE  VI.   CENTURY. 


Sap.  XVII.  lo. 

**For  whereas  wickedness  is 
fearful,  it  beareth  witness  of  its 
condemnation." 

Eccli.  III.  17. 

"And  in  justice  thou  shalt  be 
built  up,  and  in  the  day  of  afflic- 
tion thou  shalt  be  remembered  : 
and  thy  sins  shall  melt  away  as 
the  ice  in  the  fair  warm  weather." 

Sap.  II.  24. 

"  But  by  the  envy  of  the  devil, 
death  came  into  the  world." 


Sap.  VII.  24. 

"For  wisdom  is  more  active 
than  all  active  things  :  and  reach- 
eth  everywhere  by  reason  of  her 
purity." 


Eccli.  V.  7. 

**  For  mercy  and  wrath  quickly 
come  from  him,  and  his  wrath 
looketh  upon  sinners." 

Sap.  IX.  15. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Eccli.  XV.  9. 

"Praise  is  not  seemly  in  the 
mouth  of  a  sinner." 

Eccli.  X.  15. 

" —  pride  is  the  beginning  of 
all  sin  — ." 


Sap.  XII.  18. 

(Oft  quoted.) 


Ibid.  48. 

"  Whence  it  is  well  said  by  a 
certain  wise  man:  '  When  v/icked- 
ness  is  fearful,  it  beareth  testi- 
mony to  its  own  condemnation.' " 

Ibid.  S3. 

"  Whence  it  is  well  said  by  a 
certain  wise  man:  'As  ice  in  fair 
weather,  so  shall  thy  sins  be 
melted  away.'  " 

Ibid.  Bk.  XXIX.  15. 

"  Of  what  other  is  he  a  mem- 
ber, but  of  him,  of  whom  it  is 
written  :  *  Through  envy  of  the 
devil  came  death  into  the 
world?'" 

Ibid.  24. 

"  Whence  also  the  spirit  of 
wisdom  is  described  as  full  of 
motion^  that  by  means  of  that 
which  is  nowhere  absent.  He 
might  be  described  as  meeting 
us  everywhere.'  " 

Ibid.  54. 

"  For  it  is  written  :  '  For  mercy 
and  wrath  come  from  Him.'  " 

Ibid.  Bk.  XXX.  15. 

(Already  quoted.) 

Ibid.  74. 

"  — because,  as  it  is  written  : 
'Praise  is  not  seemly  in  the 
mouth  of  a  sinner.'  " 

Ibid.  Bk.  XXXI.  87. 

"  For  pride  is  the  root  of  all 
evil,  of  which  it  is  said,  as  Scrip- 
ture bears  witness  :  '  Pride  is  the 
beginning  of  all  sin.'  " 

Ibid.  Bk.  XXXII.  9. 
(Oft  quoted.) 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   VI.   CENTURY. 


233 


Eccli.  X.  15. 

(Oft  quoted.) 

Eccli.  XXIX.  33. 

"  Give  place  to  the  honorable 
presence  of  my  friends  :  for  I 
want  my  house,  my  brother  being 
to  be  lodged  with  me." 


Sap.  III.  7. 

"  The  Just  shall  shine,  and 
shall  run  to  and  fro  like  sparks 
among  the  reeds." 


Ibid.  II. 

(Oft  quoted.) 


Eccli.  V.  6—7. 

"And  say  not:  The  mercy  of 
the  Lord  is  great,  he  will  have 
mercy  on  the  multitude  of  my 
sins.  For  mercy  and  wrath 
quickly  come  from  him,  and  his 
wrath  looketh  upon  sinners." 

Eccli.  XXI.  10. 

"  The  congregation  of  sinners 
is  like  tow  heaped  together,  etc." 


Sap.  V.  6. 

"  Therefore  we  have  erred 
from  the  way  of  truth,  and  the 
light  of  justice  hath  not  shined 
unto  us,  and  the  sun  of  under- 
standing hath  not  risen  upon  us." 


Ibid. 


19. 


"  That  many  are  hay,  but  yet 
are  protected  by  the  favour  of 
sanctity,  a  certain  wise  man 
well  points  out  saying  :  *  Pass 
over,  O  stranger,  and  furnish  a 
table.'  " 

Ibid.  Bk.  XXXIII.  7. 

"  Again,  by  *  rush  '  or  '  reed ' 
is  expressed  the  brightness  of 
temporal  glory,  as  is  said  of  the 
righteous  by  Wisdom  :  '  The 
righteous  shall  shine,  and  run  to 
and  fro  like  sparks  in  the  reed- 
bed.'  " 

Ibid.  23. 

"  For  hence  it  is  said  by  a  cer- 
tain wise  man :  '  Say  not,  the 
mercies  of  the  Lord  are  many, 
He  will  not  be  mindful  of  my 
sins.'  " 


Ibid. 


55- 


"Of  this  unity  of  the  reprobate 
it  is  said  by  a  wise  man  :  '  The 
congregation  of  sinners  is  tow 
gathered  together.'  " 

Ibid.  Bk.  XXXIV.  25. 

"  For  by  the  '  sun '  the  Lord  is 
typified,  as  is  said  in  the  Book  of 
Wisdom,  that  all  the  ungodly  in 
the  day  of  the  last  judgment,  on 
knowing  their  own  condemna- 
tion, are  about  to  say:  'We  have 
erred  from  the  way  of  truth,  and 
the  light  of  righteousness  hath 
not  shined  unto  us,  and  the  sun 
rose  not  upon  us.'  " 


234 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   VI.   CENTURY. 


Eccli.  XXVII.  12. 

"  A  holy  man  continueth  in 
wisdom  as  the  sun  :  but  a  fool  is 
changed  as  the  moon." 


Eccli.  XXXII.  I. 

"  Have  they  made  thee  ruler  ? 
Be  not  lifted  up  :  be  among  them 
as  one  of  them." 


Ibid. 

"  That  the  acuteness  of  wis- 
dom is  designated  by  the  '  sun,' 
is  said  also  in  the  way  of  com- 
parison by  Solomon  :  '  A  wise 
man  continueth  as  the  sun,  a 
fool  changeth  as  the  moon.'  " 

Ibid.  53. 

"  — let  those  hear  that  which 
is  said  by  a  certain  wise  man  : 
*  Have  they  made  thee  a  ruler  ? 
Be  not  lifted  up,  but  be  among 
them  as  one  of  them.'  " 

Ibid. 

"  Let  all  hear:  "Why  art  thou 
proud,  O  earth  and  ashes  ?'  " 


Ibid.  55. 

"  The  one  speaks  by  his  mem- 
bers, saying  :  '  Let  there  be  no 
meadow,  which  our  luxury  does 
not  pass  through  ;  let  us  crown 
ourselves  with  roses  before  they 
be  withered  ;  let  us  leave  every- 
where tokens  of  our  joy.*  " 


Eccli.  X.  9. 

"  But  nothing  is  more  wicked 
than  the  covetous  man.  Why  is 
earth  and  ashes  proud  ? " 

Sap.  II.  8—9. 

"  Let  us  crown  ourselves  with 
roses,  before  they  be  withered  : 
let  no  meadow  escape  our  riot. 
Let  none  of  us  go  without  his 
part  in  luxury :  let  us  every- 
where leave  tokens  of  joy  :  for 
this  is  our  portion,  and  this  our 
lot." 

It  is  needless  to  go  through  the  entire  works  of  St.  Gregory. 
These  passages  taken  from  the  books  of  his  Exposition  of  Job, 
are  a  good  specimen  of  his  use  of  deuterocanonical  Scripture. 
And  no  man  can  say  that  Gregory  considered  these  books  as 
merely  pious  treatises.  He  introduces  his  frequent  quotations 
from  them  by  the  solemn  formulas :  "  It  is  written,"  etc.,  and 
oft  declares  them  the  Scripture  of  God.  Gregory  received  the 
Scriptures,  where  he  learned  his  faith,  from  the  Catholic 
Church ;  hence,  in  drawing  from  his  fund  of  Scriptural  know- 
ledge, he  made  no  distinction  in  practice  between  the  books  of 
the  first  and  second  Canon.  The  fact  that  Wisdom  and  Eccle- 
siasticus  are  most  used  by  him,  results  from  the  richness  of 
their  moral  teaching ;  they  were  adapted  to  his  scope.  Quota- 
tions from  all  the  deuterocanonical  books  except  Judith  and 
Baruch  are  found  in  his  works ;  but  the  proving  force  of  these 
quotations  covers  all  the  these  books,  because  it  gives  evidence 
that  he  received  the  edition  of  Scripture,  in  which  they  all 
stood  on  equal  footing.     The  question  of  Canonicity  was  to 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   VII.   CENTURY.  235 

him  more  of  a  question  ofdiscipline.  He  was  willing  to  receive 
all  the  books  since  the  Church  used  them  ;  but  he  did  not  essay- 
to  decide  the  exact  degree  of  inspiration  of  the  several  books. 

In  the  seventh  century,  three  celebrated  Fathers  flourished 
in  Spain.     First  among  these  is  St.  Isidore  of  Seville.* 

We  find  the  following  valuable  testimony  in  the  sixth  book 
of  the  Etymologies  of  St.  Isidore,  3-9:  "The  Hebrews,  on 
the  authority  of  Ezra,  receive  twenty-two  books  of  the  Old 
Testament,  according  to  the  number  of  their  letters;  and  they 
divide  them  into  three  orders,  The  Law,  The  Prophets,  and 
The  Hagiographa.  The  first  order,  The  Law,  is  received  in 
five  books,  of  which  the  first  is  Beresith,  that  is,  Genesis ;  the 
second  is  Veelle  Semoth,  that  is,  Exodus ;  the  third  is  Vaicra, 
that  is  Leviticus ;  the  fourth  is  Vajedabber,  that  is  Numbers ; 
the  fifth  is  Elle  hadebarim,  that  is  Deuteronomy.  The  second 
order  is  that  of  The  Prophets,  in  which  is  contained  eight 
books,  of  which  the  first  is  Josue  ben  Nun,  which  is  called  in 
Latin,  Jesus  Nave  ;  the  second  is  Sophtim,  that  is  Judges  ;  the 
third  is  Samuel,  that  is  the  first  of  Kings ;  the  fourth  is  Mela- 
chim,  that  is  the  second  of  Kings  ;  the  fifth  is  Isaiah  ;  the  sixth, 
Jeremiah ;  the  seventh,  Ezechiel ;  the  eighth,  Thereazar,  which 
is  called  the  twelve  prophets,  who  on  account  of  their  brevity 
are  joined  to  one  another,  and  considered  as  one  book.  The 
third  order  is  of  the  Hagiographers,  that  is  the  writers  of  holy 
things,  in  which  order  are  nine  books,  of  which,  the  first  is  Job  ; 
the  second,  the  Psalter ;  the  third,  Misle,  that  is  the  Proverbs  of 
Solomon ;  the  fourth  is  Coheleth,  that  is  Ecclesiastes ;  the 
fifth  is  Sir  Hassirim,  that  is  the  Canticle  of  Canticles;  the  sixth 
is  Daniel ;  the  seventh,  Dibre  hajamim,  that  is  the  Words  of 
the  Days,  that  is  Paralipomenon ;  the  eighth  is  Ezra ;  the 
ninth  is  Esther.  These  taken  together,  five,  eight,  and  nine, 
make  twenty-two  books,  as  were  computed  above. 

Some  enumerate  Ruth,  and  Cinoth  which  is  called  in  Latin, 
the  Lamentations  of  Jeremiah,  with  the  Hagiographa,  and 
make  twenty-four  books,  according  to  the  twenty-four  Ancients, 
who  assist  before  the  Lord. 

*The  biography  of  Isidore  of  Seville,  is  involved  in  obscurity.  His  father 
was  Severianus,  of  the  province  of  Carthagena,  in  Spain.  By  some  he  is  placed 
as  governor  of  that  province,  but  this  is  doubted  by  others.  The  precise  year 
of  Isidore's  birth  is  uncertain,  but  we  know  that  he  was  Archbishop  of 
Seville  for  nearly  forty  years,  and  that  he  died  in  636.  He  was  undoubt- 
edly the  greatest  man  of  his  time  in  Spain.  He  was  versed  in  all  the 
learning  of  his  age,  and  was  well  acquainted  with  the  classic  and  sacred 
languages,  Greek,  Latin  and  Hebrew.  The  Council  of  Toledo  in  653  called 
him  the  Doctor  of  his  age,  and  the  Ornament  of  the  Church.  His  works  are 
many,  and  embody  all  the  science  of  his  age. 


236         THE  CANON  OF  THE  VII.  CENTURY. 

There  is  a  fourth  order  with  us  of  those  books  of  the  Old 
Testament,  which  are  not  in  the  Hebrew  Canon.  The  first  of 
these  is  Wisdom  ;  the  second,  Ecclesiasticus  ;  the  third,  Tobias  ; 
the  fourth,  Judith;  the  fifth  and  sixth,  the  Maccabees. 
Although  the  Jews  separate  these  and  place  them  among  the 
Apocrypha,  the  Church  of  Christ  honors  them  and  promulgates 
them  as  divine  books''  In  this  list  Baruch  is  not  explicitly- 
mentioned,  being  considered  a  part  of  Jeremiah. 

In  his  treatise  De  Ecclesiasticis  Officiis,  Bk.  I.  XI.  4,  5,  7, 
St.  Isidore  writes  thus  :  "  In  the  first  place,  the  books  of  the 
Law,  that  is  of  Moses,  are  five,  Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus, 
Numbers,  and  Deuteronomy.  Sixteen  historical  books  follow 
these,  viz.,  Jesus  Nave,  Judges,  Ruth,  four  books  of  Kings, 
two  of  Paralipomenon,  two  of  Ezra,  Tobias,  Esther,  Judith,  and 
the  two  books  of  Maccabees.  Then  there  are  sixteen  propheti- 
cal books,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezechiel,  Daniel,  and  the  twelve 
minor  Prophets.  After  these  come  eight  books  in  verse,  which 
are  written  in  various  kinds  of  metre  in  Hebrew.  They  are 
Job,  the  Psalms,  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  the  Canticle  of  Canti- 
cles, the  Book  of  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  and  the  Lamentations 
of  Jeremiah,  and  thus  there  are  made  up  forty-five  books  of 
the  Old  Testament.  *  *  *  *  These  are  the  seventy-two 
canonical  books,  and  on  this  account  Moses  elected  the  elders, 
who  should  prophecy.  For  this  cause,  the  Lord  Jesus  sent 
seventy-two  disciples  to  preach." 

The  number  here  agrees  with  the  number  of  the  Council 
of  Trent,  but  there  is  a  slight  variation,  in  that  St.  Isidore 
considers  Baruch  a  part  of  Jeremiah,  and  detaches  Lamenta- 
tions as  a  separate  book.  Excepting  this  slight  variation, 
the  testimony  of  Isidore  well  represents  the  belief  of  the 
Church  of  his  age.  The  first  testimony  quoted  also  explains 
the  writings  of  preceding  Fathers,  in  constituting  a  two-fold 
order  of  books  of  the  Old  Testament :  those  that  were  in  the 
Canon  of  the  Hebrews,  and  those  that  were  not,  but  which 
by  the  Church  were  honored  and  promulgated  as  divine  books. 
The  first  were  often  called  by  the  Fathers  the  canonical  books 
of  the  Old  Testament,  and  in  excluding  the  deuterocanonical 
works  from  this  order,  they  left  them  in  the  second  order  of 
Isidore. 

In  his  prologue  to  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  I.  7,  8, 
we  find  the  following :  "  Of  these  (the  historical  books),  the 
Hebrews  do  not  receive  Tobias,  Judith,  and  Maccabees,  but 
the  Church  ranks  them  among  the  Canonical  Scriptures.  Then 
follow  also  those  two  great  books —  books  of  holy  teaching.  Wis- 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   VII.   CENTURY.  237 

dom  and  Ecclesiasticus ;  which,  although  they  are  said  to  be 
written  by  Jesus  the  son  of  Sirach,  nevertheless,  on  account 
of  the  similarity  of  diction,  are  called  of  Solomon.  And  these 
are  acknowledged  to  have,  in  the  Church,  equal  authority  with 
the  other  canonical  Scriptures." 

St.  Isidore  does  not  represent  tradition,  when  he  states 
that  Wisdom  is  said  to  be  the  work  of  Sirach.  He  was  there 
explaining  a  fact,  and  had  only  the  warrant  of  his  own  critical 
knowledge  on  which  to  rely ;  but  the  fact  itself,  he  received 
from  the  Church,  and  this  was  that  the  Church  of  his  day  made 
equal  those  books,  that  she  afterwards  proclaimed  equal  by 
solemn  decree  in  the  Council  of  Trent. 

The  second  witness  for  the  Church  of  Spain,  in  St.  Ildefon- 
SUS,  the  disciple  of  St.  Isidore,  afterward  Archbishop  of  Toledo, 
who  died  in  669.  In  his  Treatise  on  Baptism,  Chapter  LXXIX. 
he  received  the  Canon  of  St.  Augustine,  in  St.  Augustine's 
identical  words,  with  perhaps  the  addition  of  one  word  to 
strengthen  the  authority  of  the  deuterocanonical  books. 

St.  Eugene,  bishop  of  Toledo,  who  died  in  657,  sets  forth 
the  Canon  of  St.  Isidore  in  Latin  verse.* 

There  is  sometimes  invoked  against  us  the  authority  of  St. 
John  Damascene,  a  priest  of  Damascus,  who  flourished  about 
730  A.  D.  He  has  drawn  up  a  catalogue  of  the  books  of  the 
Old  and  New  Testaments :  concerning  the  former  he  says  : 
"  It  is  to  be  observed  that  there  are  twenty-two  books  of  the  Old 
Testament,  according  to  the  letters  of  the  Hebrew  language." 
The  only  deuterocanonical  works  which  he  mentions,  are 
Wisdom  and  Ecclesiasticus,  of  which  he  declares  that  they  are 
excellent  and  useful,  but  are  not  numbered,  nor  were  they 
placed  in  the  Ark." 

The  Damascene  is  evidently  simply  stating  the  status  of 
the  deuterocanonical  books  with  the  Jews,  and  in  this  he  is  in- 
fluenced by  the  extravagant  ideas  of  St.  Ephrem.  His  own 
judgment  of  the  books  is  set  forth  in  his  declaration  that  they 
are  excellent  and  useful,  and  one  could  legitimately  make  the 

*"  Regula  quos  fldei  commendat  noscere  libros, 
Hos  nostra  praesens  bibliotheca  tenet : 
Quinque  priora  gerit  veneranda  volumina  Legis  ; 
Hinc  losues,  optimaque  hinc  Ruth  Moabitica  gesta 
Bisbis  Regum  nectuntur  in  ordine  libri. 
Atque  bis  octoni  concurrunt  inde  prophetae  ; 
En  lob,  Psalterium,  Salomon  et  Verba  dierum, 
Esdrae  consequitur  Esther,  Sapientia,  lesus, 
Tobi  et  ludith  ;  concludit  haec  Machabaeorum  ; 
Hie  Testament!  Veteris  finisque  modusque." 


238         THE   CANON   OF  THE   VIH.   AND   IX.   CENTURIES. 

illation  from  his  testimony;  therefore,  the  Church  receives 
them,  because  they  are  excellent  and  useful,  even  though  not 
in  the  Canon  of  the  Jews.  His  practice  warrants  the  illation, 
for  he  quotes  both  Wisdom  and  Ecclesiasticus  as  divine  Scrip- 
ture. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  ninth  century  NiCEPHORUS,  patri- 
arch of  Constantinople,  drew  up  (in  his  Stichometry)  a  cata- 
logue of  books,  which  contains  twenty-two  books.  In  this  list, 
Baruch  finds  place,  while  Esther  is  passed  over  in  silence.  After 
the  list  of  the  canonical  books  of  the  Old  and  the  New  Testa- 
ments, there  is  placed  a  list  of  avrtXeyofieva  which  com- 
prises The  Maccabees,  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  The  Psalms  of 
Solomon,  Esther,  Judith,  Susanna  and  Tobias.  This  list  has 
a  close  affinity  to  the  Synopsis  of  the  Pseudo-Athanasius,  and 
is  of  no  worth  in  establishing  the  tradition  of  the  Church  of 
Constantinople,  for  at  that  very  time,  in  virtue  of  the  decree  of 
the  Council  of  Trullo,  the  Canon  of  the  Carthaginian  Council 
was  adopted  by  the  Greek  Church.  Nicephorus,  like  many  of 
his  time,  held  in  great  veneration  the  ancient  documents,  which 
had  been  preserved.  He  most  probably  reproduced  here  some 
old  writing  without  essaying  to  judge  its  critical  value. 

PhotiUS  has  placed  in  his  Syntagma  Canonum,  the  eighty- 
fifth  Canon  of  the  Apostles,  the  sixtieth  Canon  of  Laodicea, 
and  the  twenty-fourth  Canon  of  Carthage.* 

From  the  fact  that  he  receives  the  decree  of  the  Council  of 
Cathage,  it  is  evident  that  he  is  at  one  with  us  on  the  ques- 
tion of  the  Canon.  He  evidently  believed  that  the  curtailed 
canons  were  completed  by  the  decree  of  Carthage. 

*Photius,  patriarch  of  Constantinople,  was  descended  from  one  of  the  most 
illustrious  and  richest  families  of  that  city.  His  brother  Sergius  married  one 
of  the  sisters  of  the  Emperor.  Photius  made  use  of  his  splendid  advantages 
to  acquire  a  vast  and  varied  education.  Bardas,  the  restorer  of  letters,  was 
his  tutor.  Photius  became  eminent  in  all  the  departments  of  human  know- 
ledge. His  birth  and  his  talents  elevated  him  to  the  highest  dignities,  even 
to  become  Secretary  of  State  to  the  Court  of  Constantinople.  After  passing 
through  these  civil  posts,  he  embraced  the  ecclesiastical  state,  and  became  a 
great  theologian.  The  character  of  Photius  was  proud  and  cunning.  By 
intrigue,  he  deposed  Ignatius  the  legitimate  patriarch  of  Constantinople,  and 
placed  himself  on  the  throne.  By  flattery,  he  kept  his  usurped  post,  by  favor 
of  the  Emperor  Michel.  By  similar  means,  he  corrupted  the  legates  of  Pope 
Nicolas  I.,  so  that  they  assisted  at  the  Conciliabulum  in  861,  and  confirmed 
Photius  in  the  See.  On  hearing  these  acts,  Pope  Nicolas  declared  null  and 
void  the  said  acts,  and  anathematized  Photius.  Photius,  in  turn,  convoked  a 
council  at  Constantinople  in  866,  and  pronounced  sentence  of  deposition  and 
excommunication  against  the  Pope.  When  Basil,  the  Macedonian,  succeeded 
Michel  in  the  empire,  he  deposed  Photius,  and  restored  Ignatius.    At  this 


THE   CANON    OF  THE   VIII.    AND   IX.   CENTURIES.        239 

Even  after  its  defection  from  Rome,  the  Greek  Church  has 
always  received  the  deuterocanonical  books.  To  this  Zonaras 
and  Balsamon  testify.* 

When,  in  the  seventeenth  century,  Cyrill  Lucar  en- 
deavored to  introduce  protestant  ideas  into  the  Greek  Church, 
he  failed  to  expel  from  the  Canon  the  deuterocanonical  books.f 
Against  him  the  members  of  the  Council  of  Jerusalem  decreed 
that,  "following  the  rule  of  the  Catholic  Church,  we  call  Holy 
Scripture  all  those  books  which  Cyrill  received  from  the 
Council  of  Laodicea,  and  in  addition  those  books  which  Cyrill, 
unwisely,  ignorantly,  or  rather  maliciously  called  Apocryphal, 
viz..  Wisdom  of  Solomon,  Judith,  Tobias,  the  History  of  the 
Dragon  (deuterocanonical  fragment  of  Daniel),  The  History  of 
Susanna  (idem),  The  Maccabees,  and  The  Wisdom  of  Sirach. 
We  judge  that  these  should  be  enumerated  with  the  other 
genuine  books  of  Holy  Scripture,  as  genuine  parts  of  the  same 
Scripture.":}: 

In  the  council  which  Parthenius,  Patriarch  of  Constantinople 
held  in   1638  at  Constantinople,  in  which  sat  two  other  patri- 

juncture  was  celebrated  at  Constantinople  the  VIII.  Oecumenical  Council,  in 
which  Photius  and  his  partizans  were  anathematized.  Photius  composed  a 
chimerical  history,  in  which  he  made  Basil  descend  from  Tiridates,  the 
Armenian  King.  Basil  was,  in  fact,  low-born,  and  this  coup  won  his  favor  to 
Photius,  whom  he  restored  in  877.  Pope  John  VIII.,  deceived  by  Basil  and 
Photius,  at  first  received  him  into  the  communion  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  but 
afterwards,  ascertaining  the  falsehood  of  Photius,  excommunicated  him.  The 
successive  Popes,  Martin,  Adrian  and  Stephen,  anathematized  him.  It  was  at 
this  point  that  Photius  brought  against  the  Church  of  Rome  the  charge  of 
heresy,  in  having  joined  the  "  Filioque  "  to  the  Creed.  This  was  the  origin  of 
the  Greek  schism,  which  divided  the  East  from  the  West,  and  drew  from  the 
Church  of  Christ  the  Greek  world.  Photius  was  finally  imprisoned  in  a  mon- 
astery by  the  Emperor  Leo  the  Philosopher ;  and  he  died  in  this  retreat  in 
891.  Fleury  gives  a  good  resume  of  the  character  of  Photius  in  these  words  : 
"  He  was  the  grandest  spirit,  and  most  learned  man  of  his  time  ;  but  he  was, 
at  the  same  time,  a  perfect  hypocrite :  while  acting  like  a  villain,  he  spoke 
like  a  saint."  The  works  of  Photius  are  many,  characterized  by  great 
erudition. 


*Zonaras,  and  Balsamon's  Explanation  of  the  Council  in  Trullo,  Chap.  II. 
See  Synod.  Beveregii,  Migne,  137,  524 ;  138, 122. 

f  Cyrill  Lucar  was  born  in  the  Isle  of  Candia  in  1572.  He  studied  in 
Venice,  Padua,  and  in  Germany  ;  and  in  the  latter  place  became  imbued  with 
Lutheran  ideas.  He  was  placed  in  the  See  of  Alexandria,  and  afterwards  in 
that  of  Constantinople,  As  it  became  clear  that  he  embraced  the  tenets  of 
Lutheranism,  the  clergy  rose  against  him,  and  he  was  exiled  to  Rhodes.  He 
was  soon  afterwards  restored  to  his  see,  and  subsequently  for  six  or  seven 
times  he  was  deposed  and  restored.  He  was  finally  strangled,  while  returning 
from  exile.     He  had  the  real  qualities  of  a  heretic,  presumption  and  intrigue. 

:t:Cfr.  Kimmel,  Monumenta  Fidei  Orientalis,  Jenae,  1850,  I.  42. 


240         THE   CANON   OF  THE   VIII.   AND   IX.   CENTURIES. 

archs  and  one  hundred  and  twenty  bishops,  a  synodical  letter 
was  drawn  up  and  sent  to  the  provincial  synod  convened  at 
Jassy,  in  which  the  opinion  of  Cyrill  Lucar,  who  expunged 
from  Holy  Scripture  holy  and  canonical  books,  and  as  such 
received  by  the  holy  synods,  is  declared  to  be  heresy,  breathing 
forth  from  all  parts,  and  utterly  contrary  to  the  orthodox  faith."^ 
In  later  centuries,  Protestant  ideas  have  invaded  in  some  part 
the  Russian  Church  to  the  extent  that  Philaretes  (ti868) 
authorized  the  following  catechismal  text,  and  this  was  ap- 
proved by  the  Synod  : 

"  Q.     How  many  are  the  books  of  the  old  Testament  ? 

A.  St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  St.  Athanasius  the  Great,  and 
St.  John  Damascene  reckon  them  at  twenty-two ;  agreeing 
therein  with  the  Jews,  who  so  reckon  them  in  the  Hebrew 
tongue.  Athanas.  Ep.  XXXIX.  de  Test.  [Fest.]  J.  Damasc. 
Theol.  1.  IV.  c.  17. 

Q.  Why  should  we  attend  to  the  reckoning  of  the 
Hebrews? 

A.  Because,  as  the  Apostle  Paul  says,  unto  them  were  com- 
mitted the  oracles  of  God :  and  the  sacred  books  of  the  Old 
Testament  have  been  received  from  the  Hebrew  Church  of 
that  Testament  by  the  Christian  Church  of  the  New. 

Q.  How  do  St.  Cyril  and  St.  Athanasius  enumerate  the 
Books  of  the  Old  Testament  ? 

A.  As  follows:  i.  The  book  of  Genesis:  2.  Exodus:  3 
Leviticus:  4.  The  book  of  Numbers:  5.  Deuteronomy :  6.  The 
book  of  Jesus  the  son  of  Nun  :  7.  The  book  of  Judges,  and 
with  it,  as  an  appendix,  the  book  of  Ruth :  8.  The  first  and 
second  books  of  Kings,  as  two  parts  of  one  book :  9.  The  third 
and  fourth  books  of  Kings  :  10.  The  first  and  second  books  of 
Paralipomena :  11.  The  first  book  of  Esdras,  and  the  second, 
or,  as  it  is  entitled  in  Greek,  the  book  of  Nehemiah :  12.  The 
book  of  Esther:  13.  The  book  of  Job:  14.  The  book  of 
Psalms:  15.  The  Proverbs  of  Solomon:  16.  Ecclesiastes,  also 
by  Solomon :  17.  The  Song  of  Songs,  also  by  Solomon:  18. 
The  book  of  the  Prophet  Isaiah  :  19.  Of  Jeremiah :  20.  Of 
Ezekiel :  21.  Of  Daniel :  22.  Of  the  twelve  Prophets. 

Q.  Why  is  no  notice  taken,  in  this  enumeration  of  the 
books  of  the  Old  Testament,  of  the  book  of  Wisdom,  of  the 
Son  of  Sirach,  and  certain  others  ? 

A.     Because  they  do  not  exist  in  Hebrew. 

Q.     How  are  we  to  regard  these  last  named  books? 

*Kimmel  1.  c,  page  415. 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   VHI.   AND   IX.   CENTURIES.         241 

A.  Athanasius  the  Great  says,  that  they  have  been  ap- 
pointed by  the  fathers  to  be  read  by  proselytes,  who  are  pre- 
paring for  admission  into  the  Church." 

Philaretes  was  a  disciple  of  Cyrill  Lucar,  and  introduced 
many  protestant  ideas  into  the  Russian  Church ;  but  in  the 
days  when  the  tradition  of  that  Church  was  worth  aught,  it 
was  not  so.  All  the  Churches  of  the  East  were  in  accord  in 
accepting  the  deuterocanonical  books. 

Up  to  recent  times  the  CoDEX  Amiatinus,  was  believed  to 
date  back  to  the  middle  of  the  sixth  century.  M.  De  Rossi 
has  demonstrated  that  this  manuscript  was  copied  in  the  first 
years  of  the  eighth  century  in  the  Monastery  of  Wearmouth,  in 
Northumberland,  by  the  monks  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  Ceolfrid."* 

It  was  given  to  Pope  Gregory  II.  in  716.  It  is  considered 
the  finest  Codex  in  all  this  world  of  the  Vulgate  of  St.  Jerome. 
//  contains  all  the  protocanonical  and  deuterocanonical  books, 
uniting  Baruch  with  Jeremiah,  and  making  explicit  mention  of 
the  same.  This  is  important  in  proving  force,  since  it  repre- 
sents the  text  of  Scripture  brought  into  England  by  the 
missionaries  of  Gregory  the  Great. 

In  the  first  years  of  the  ninth  century,  Alcuin,  by  order  of 
Charlemagne,  made  an  edition  of  the  Scriptures.f 

*Vide  infra. 


f  Alcuin,  surnamed  Flaccus,  was  born,  towards  the  year  of  735,  of  a  noble 
Anglo-Saxon  family  in  Northumberland.  His  education  was  placed  under 
the  care  of  Egbert,  Archbishop  of  York,  and  he  had  for  tutor  Aelbert  of  the 
ecclesiastical  school  of  York.  Aelbert  took  him  on  a  pilgrimage  to  Rome, 
and,  on  the  return,  visited  with  him  Charlemagne.  Aelbert  was  elected  to  the 
See  of  York  in  766,  and  thereupon,  placed  Alcuin  director  of  the  school  of  the 
diocese.  Alcuin  held  this  post  till  780.  In  781,  he  was  sent  to  Rome  to  bear 
thence  the  pallium  for  Eanbald,  successor  of  Aelbert  in  the  see  of  York.  On 
his  return,  he  again  visited  Charlemagne,  who  invited  him  to  fix  his  abode  in 
his  dominions.  Having  sought  and  obtained  the  authorization  of  his  arch- 
bishop and  king,  he  arrived  in  France  in  782,  and  took  the  post  of  teacher  in 
the  royal  school.  Charlemagne  became  his  pupil,  and,  later  on,  conferred  on 
him  the  abbeys  of  Ferrieres,  St.  Loup  de  Troyes,  St.  Josse  in  Ponthieu,  and 
of  St.  Martin  of  Tours.  In  790,  Alcuin  revisited  England,  but  Charlemagne 
soon  summoned  him  into  France  to  combat  the  heresy  of  Adoptionism.  In 
opposing  this  heresy,  Alcuin's  principal  theological  works  were  written. 
Towards  796,  Alcuin  retired  to  St.  Martin  of  Tours,  and  devoted  himself  there 
to  teaching,  whereby  the  school  became  famous.  By  his  orders,  a  rich  library 
was  collected,  and  many  manuscripts  copied.  Alcuin  remained  through  life 
a  deacon  of  the  Catholic  Church.  His  last  years  were  troubled  by  a  dispute 
with  Theodulf,  Bishop  of  Orleans,  regarding  a  priest  who  had  been  con- 
demned to  imprisonment  by  Theodulf,  and  who  had  sought  refuge  at  Saint 
Martin.  In  this  affair,  Charlemagne  treated  him  with  severity.  He  died  in 
804,  at  the  age  of  69  years,  and  was  interred  in  the  Church  of  St.  Martin.  He 
is  the  author  of  many  works,  mostly  treating  of  scriptural  subjects.  One  of 
the  most  important  of  his  works  was  his  correction  of  the  Bible,  by  order  of 
Charlemagne. 
P 


242         THE  CAKON  OF  THE  VIII.  AND   IX.   CENTURIES. 

The  CODEX  Paulinus  or  Carolinus,  preserved  at  the 
Basilica  of  St.  Paul  outside  the  walls  of  Rome,  executed  in  the 
ninth  century,  contains  Alcuin's  recension,  in  which  we  find  all 
the  deuterocanonical  books  except  Baruch.  The  CODEX  Stat- 
IANUS  or  Vallicellianus  in  the  Vallicella  Library  at  Rome, 
and  other  manuscripts  called  the  Bibles  of  Charlemagne,  at 
Zurich,  Bamberg,  and  in  the  British  Museum,  contain  the  same 
list  of  Alcuin's  revised  books.  Moreover,  Alcuin  has  drawn 
up  a  complete  Canon  of  both  protocanonical  and  deutero- 
canonical books  in  the  following  verses  : 

*"  In  hoc  quinque  libri,  retinentur  Codice  Mosis, 
Bella  duels  Josue,  senionim  et  tempora  patrum. 
Ruth,  Job,  et  Regum  bis  bin!  namque  libelli ; 
Atque  Prophetarum  sanctl  bis  octo  libelli ; 
Carmina  prseclari  Christi  patris  hymnica  David, 
Et  tria  pacifici  Salomonis  opuscula  regis. 
Jungitur  his  Sophise  Jesu  simul  atque  libellus, 
Et  Paralipomenis  enim  duo  nempe  libelli. 
Hinc  Ezrae,  Nehemise,  Hester,  Judith  atque  libelli 
Et  duo  namque  libri  Machabsea  bella  tenentes. 
Matthaei  et  Marei,  Lucse  liber,  atque  Joannis 
Inclyta  gesta  tenens  salvantis  saecula  Christi. 
Sanctus  Apostolicos  Lucas  conscripserat  Actus ; 
Bis  septem  sancti  per  chartas  dogmata  Pauli, 
Jacobi,  Petri,  Judse  et  pia  dicta  Joannis  : 
Scribitur  extremo  Joannis  in  ordine  tomus. 
Hos  lege,  tu  lector  felix,  feliciter  omnes. 
Ad  laudem  Christi  propriamque  in  saecla  salutem." 


"  Tres  Salamon  libros  mirabilis  edidit  auctor, 

His  duo  junguntur  per  paradigma  libri ; 
Quorum  quippe  prior  Sapientia  dicitur  alma, 

Notatur  Jesu  nomine  posterior 
Hinc  Paralipomenonis  adest  sacer  illo  libellus. 

Qui  veteris  Legis  dicitur  epitome 
Hinc  Bkrm,  Nehmim,  Judith,  Hesterque  libelli ; 

Tunc  ToMce  pietas,  angelus,  actus,  iter. 
Inclyta  nam  binis  MacTiabaea  bella  libellis 

Scribuntur,  victis  gentibus  et  populis. 
Haec  est  sancta  quidem  Legis  Scriptura  Vetustse, 

Divinis  tota  quae  titulis  redolet." 

Some  endeavor  to  shake  Alcuin's  authority  for  the  deutero- 
canonical books,  by  citing  a  passage  from  the  eighteenth  para- 
graph of  his  first  book  against  Elipandus.  This  Elipandus  had 
cited,  in  support  of  Adoptionism,  the  text  from  Ecclesiasticus 
XXXVI.  14 :  "  Miserere,  Domine,  plebi  tuae,  super  quam  invo- 
catum  est  nomen  tuum,  et  Israel  quem  coaequasti  primogenito 
tuo."     Alcuin    replies :    "  In  the  book  of   Jesus,  the    Son  of 

*P.  L.  Migne,  101,  pag.  731-734. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  VIII.   AND   IX.    CENTURIES.        243 

Sirach,  the  aforesaid  sentence  is  read,  of  which  book  blessed 
Jerome  and  Isidore  unresevedly  testify  that  it  is  placed  among 
the  apocryphal,  that  is  to  say,  the  doubtful  books." 

In  relation  to  this  testimony,  we  must  first  observe  that 
Alcuin  errs  in  stating  that  Isidore  placed  Ecclesiasticus  among 
the  Apocrypha.  A  close  examination  of  his  works  reveals  no 
such  statement ;  he  is  a  plain  advocate  of  Ecclesiasticus  and 
all  the  other  deuterocanonical  works.  We  know  what  was  the 
opinion  of  Jerome,  and  what  were  its  causes.  The  present 
question,  therefore,  is:  did  Alcuin  adopt  the  opinion  of  Jerome? 
We  answer  this  question  in  the  negative,  on  the  clearest  evi- 
dence. To  say  nothing  of  the  complete  lists  of  Scripture  in  the 
verses  already  quoted ;  to  say  nothing  of  the  recension  of  all 
the  books  of  the  Catholic  Canon,  in  the  edition  prepared  by 
Alcuin  for  Charlemagne,  we  have  clear  and  express  statements 
from  Alcuin  that  Ecclesiasticus  is  divinely  inspired  Scripture. 
We  select  the  following  three  passages : 

De  Virtutibus  at  Vitiis,  XIV. 
Eccli.V.  8.  XVIII. 

"  Non  tardes  converti  ad  Do-  "  The  saying  is  read  in  the  di- 
minum,  et  ne  differas  de  die  in  vinely  inspired  Scriptures  :  *  Fill, 
diem  — ."  ne   tardes    converti    ad    Deum, 

quia  nescis  quid  futura  pariat 
dies.'....  These  are  the  words 
of  God,  not  mine  " 

In  the  fifteenth  chapter  of  the  same  treatise,  he  quotes 
Ecclesiasticus  three  times,  as  authoritative  Scripture.  In  the 
eighteenth  chapter  this  passage  occurs: 

Eccli.  XVIII.  30—31.  De  Virtutibus  et  Vitiis,  XVIII. 

"Post  concupiscentias  tuas  non  "  Holy  Scripture,  therefore,  ad- 

eas,  et  a  voluntate  tua  avertere.  monishes  us,  saying  :  '  Go  not 
Si  praestes  animae  tuae  concu-  after  thy  lusts,  but  turn  away 
piscentias  ejus,  faciet  te  in  gau-  from  thy  own  will.  If  thou  give 
dium  inimicis  tuis."  to  thy  soul  her  desires,  she  will 

make  thee  a  joy  to  thy  enemies.' " 

If  words  mean  anything,  Alcuin's  position  was  that  Eccle- 
siasticus was  divinely  inspired  Scripture,  and  the  word  of  God. 
The  Council  of  Trent  asks  no  more  than  this  for  the  book.  In 
practical  usage,  Alcuin  made  no  difference  between  the  two 
classes  of  books.  The  passage  objected  by  our  adversaries 
relates  only  to  Ecclesiasticus,  and  we  honestly  claim  to  have 
shown  that  Alcuin  did  not  make  his  own  the  opinion  of  St. 


244         THE   CANON   OF  THE  VIII.   AND   IX.   CENTURIES. 

Jerome.  To  reconcile  the  aforesaid  passage  with  Alcuin's  real 
belief,  we  must  observe  that  it  occurs  in  a  controversial  work 
directed  against  Elipandus,  the  heretical  Archbishop  of  Toledo. 
In  that  treatise,  his  aim  was  to  obtain  victory  over  his  opponent, 
and  to  that  purpose,  he  was  willing  to  use  every  argument 
that  would  have  any  weight,  even  though  it  did  not  express 
his  personal  conviction.  Elipandus  had  quoted  a  passage  from 
Ecclesiasticus  that  seemed  to  make  for  Adoptionism.  Alcuin 
first  endeavors  to  weaken  the  adversary's  position  by  throwing 
the  doubt  of  St.  Jerome  on  the  book,  and  then  directly  meets 
the  objection  by  explaining  the  passage.  Such  mode  of  dealing 
with  adversaries  characterizes  the  writings  of  many  of  the 
Fathers.  In  the  treatise,  De  Virtutibus  et  Vitiis,  Alcuin 
speaks  as  a  calm  exponent  of  the  Church's  doctrine,  and  draws 
his  materials  from  the  commonly  received  deposit  of  Holy 
Scripture  of  that  time. 

In  face  of  all  this,  it  is  nauseating  to  find  the  protestant 
writer  Home  placing  Alcuin  among  those  who  testify  that  the 
apocryphal  {deuterocanonical)  books  form  no  part  of  the  Canon  of 
divinely  inspired  Scripture.* 

Protestantism  has  been  fed  on  lies  from  the  beginning. 

The  Codex  Toletanus,  of  Toledo  in  Spain,  which,  accord- 
ing to  critics,  dates  back  to  the  eighth  century,  contains  all  the 
deuterocanonical  books  except  Baruch. 

The  Codex  Cavensis,  of  the  Abbey  of  La  Cava  near 
Salerno,  contains  all  the  deuterocanonical  books.  This  manu- 
script is  probably  of  Spanish  origin,  of  the  end  of  the  eighth  or 
beginning  of  ninth  century.     It  contains  the  text  of  Jerome. 

Theodulf,  Bishop  of  Orleans,  contemporary  with  Alcuin, 
made  a  recension  of  the  books  of  Scripture,  of  which  two 
copies  are  in  the  National  Museum  at  Paris,  and  another  is 
preserved  in  the  Cathedral  at  Puy.  In  the  Bible  of  Theodulf, 
all  the  deuterocanonical  books  find  place. 

Venerable  Bede  wrote  an  allegorical  exposition  of  the 
book  of  Tobias,  and  in  his  use  of  Scriptures  makes  no  distinc- 
tion  between    protocanonical   and   deuterocanonical    books.f 

♦Home's  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  Scripture,  Vol.  I.  Appendix  I. 
484. 


fBede  was  born  at  Jarrow,  on  the  confines  of  Northumberland  and  Scot- 
land, in  673.  His  parents  were  Anglo-Saxons  who  had  embraced  the  Catholic 
religion.  At  the  age  of  seven  years,  they  confided  the  child  Bede,  which 
means  in  their  tongue  'prayer,  to  the  Abbot  Benoit  Biscop,  who  was  a  second 
father  to  the  child.  After  three  years  passed  with  Benoit,  Bede  was  placed 
with  the  famous  Ceolfrid,  who  taught  him  the  elements  of  sacred  and  profane 
literatiire.    As  disciple  of  Ceolfrid,  Bede  acquired  all  the  science  of  his 


THE  CANON   OF  THE  VIII.  AND   IX.    CENTURIES.        245 

Against  the  authority  of  Bede  two  objections  are  raised. 

In  his  treatise,  De  Temporum  Ratione,  he  writes  as 
follows  :  "  Thus  far  divine  Scripture  contains  the  series  of 
events.  The  subsequent  history  of  the  Jews  is  exhibited  in  the 
book  of  Maccabees,  and  in  the  writings  of  Josephus  and  Afri- 
canus,  who  continue  the  subsequent  history  down  to  the  time 
of  the  Romans."* 

According  to  our  adversaries,  Bede  here  draws  a  sharp 
distinction  between  divine  Scripture  and  the  mere  profane 
history  of  the  books  of  Maccabees.  In  dealing  with  this 
objection,  we  place  first  of  all  that  it  leaves  the  canonicity 
of  all  the  deuterocanonical  books  except  the  Maccabees 
intact.  This  is  self-evident  since  he  is  speaking  of  his- 
torical books  alone.  In  the  second  place,  we  must  interpret 
the  obscure  passages  of  a  writer  according  to  his  certain  posi- 
tion, revealed  in  his  other  works.  Now  Bede  has  quoted  all 
the  deuterocanonical  books  in  the  solemn  formulas,  customary 
in  introducing  divine  Scripture.  Did  he  therefore  reject 
Maccabees,  he  would  disagree  with  himself,  and  be  absurdly  in- 
consistent. We  believe,  therefore,  that  in  distinguishing  Mac- 
cabees from  the  other  historical  books  of  divine  Scripture, 
he  merely  wishes  to  point  out  that  it  does  not  alone  continue 
the  series  of  historical  events  from  Ezra  to  the  era  of  the 
Romans.  Up  to  the  time  of  Ezra,  indeed,  not  all  historical 
events  were  written,  but  enough  was  written  to  form  a  continu- 
ous chain  of  chief  events,  and  no  other  writings  contain  the 
events  of  those  times  except  the  Holy  Books,  which  follow 
each  other  in  a  certain  historical  series.  But  after  Ezra  a 
great  lacuna  occurs  in  the  history  of  the  Jews  down  to  the 
time  of  the  Romans,  which  is  only  partly  bridged  over  by  the 
combined  data  of  Maccabees,  Africanus,  and  Josephus.  The 
second  book  of  Maccabees  covers  a  period  of  only  about  six- 
teen years  ;  the  first,  of  about  forty.  They  are  partly  syn- 
chronous, and  combined  would  not  cover  a  period  of  over  fifty 
years.  Hence  Bede  could  not  say  that  divine  Scripture  con- 
times.  At  the  age  of  19,  he  became  deacon  ;  and  at  the  age  of  30,  priest.  He 
began  to  write  at  the  age  of  thirty,  and  has  left  extended  commentaries  on 
neariy  all  the  books  of  Holy  Scripture.  Excepting  Augustine  and  Jerome,  no 
Father  has  wrought  such  a  vast  exegetical  work.  Boniface,  the  Apostle  of 
Germany,  was  wont  to  term  Bede  the  wisest  of  the  exegetes  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture. Full  oft,  however,  he  drifts  away  from  the  literal  sense  into  an  exces- 
sive mysticism.  The  whole  life  of  Bede  was  passed  in  the  cloister.  He  died 
in  735.  Bede  and  Isidore  of  Seville  were  the  chief  sources  of  Christian  educa- 
tion during  the  middle  ages. 

*P.  L.  Migne,  90,  539. 


246         THE  CANON  OF  THE  IX.  CENTURY. 

tained  the  series  of  events  down  to  the  Roman  epoch.  He, 
therefore,  drew  a  distinction  between  Maccabees  and  the  pre- 
ceding historical  books,  not  from  the  nature  of  the  books,  but 
from  the  fact  that  the  scriptural  history  of  the  Jews  became 
broken  at  Ezra,  and  the  fragment  of  it  which  existed  in  Macca- 
bees had  to  be  supplemented  by  the  two  cited  authors. 

The  second  objection  is  taken  from  Bede's  commentary  on 
the  Apocalypse,  Chapter  IV.  Therein  he  states  :  "  The  six 
wings  of  the  four  animals,  which  are  twenty-four,  signify  so 
many  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  in  which  the  authority  of 
the  evangelists  is  confirmed,  and  their  truth  is  corroborated."* 

It  is  pitiably  absurd  to  make  Bede,  who  throughout  his  vast 
works  has  quoted  the  deuterocanonical  books  side  by  side,  and 
in  equal  place  with  the  protocanonical  Scriptures,  reject  them 
on  the  warrant  of  this  one  passage.  It  is  Bede's  evident 
opinion  here  to  consider  the  protocanonical  books  as  a  class  by 
themselves,  without  detracting  from  the  divinity  of  the  deu- 
terocanonical works.  The  classing  of  the  protocanonical  works 
in  a  distinct  class,  was  warranted  by  patristic  literature,  and  this 
diligent  student  of  patrology  drew  therefrom  a  mystic  argu- 
ment, without  throwing  doubt  on  the  deuterocanonical  books, 
which  formed  a  class  by  themselves.  The  last  factor  in  re- 
moving this  class  distinction,  and  making  the  two  classes 
perfectly  equal,  was  the  decree  of  the  Council  of  Trent. 

In  our  review  of  these  centuries,  we  can  not  notice  every 
writer  who  has  written,  relating  to  the  books  of  Holy  Scripture. 
We  shall  content  ourselves  with  adducing  representative  men 
as  the  exponents  of  the  Church's  belief  through  these  ages. 

Rhabanus  Maurus  follows  on  the  question  of  the  Canon 
St.  Isidore  of  Seville.f  As  Rhabanus  was  a  faithful  follower 
of  the  Fathers  of  the  Church,  his  Canon  may  be  called  the 
Canon  of  tradition  of  this  century.  In  his  work,  De  Institu- 
tione  Clericorum,  Chap.  53,  he  formulates  the  following  Canon: 

*P.  L.  Migne  93,  144. 


■f-Rhabanus  Maurus  was  born  at  Fulda  in  788  of  one  of  the  first  noble 
families  of  the  country.  At  the  age  of  six  years,  he  was  offered  by  hia 
parents  to  the  monastery  of  Fulda,  wherein  his  childhood  was  passed.  He 
was  sent  later  on  to  Tours,  and  studied  under  Alcuin.  On  his  return  to 
Fulda,  he  was  elected  abbot,  and  distinguished  himself  by  reconciling  Louis 
the  debonnaire,  with  his  sons.  He  was  elected  Archbishop  of  Mayence  in 
847,  and,  as  such,  was  distinguished  for  learning  and  zeal  in  guarding  the 
faith.  He  died  in  856  at  the  age  of  68  years.  His  works,  printed  at  Cologne 
in  1627,  form  six  tomes  in  folio,  bound  in  three  volumes.  His  works  on 
Scripture  are  mostly  extracts  from  the  Fathers,  which  was  the  mode  of  the 
study  of  theology  of  that  time. 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   IX.  AND   X.   CENTURIES.  247 

"  These  are,  therefore,  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament ;  in 
love  of  doctrine  and  piety,  the  chief  men  of  the  Churches  have 
handed  down  that  these  should  be  read  and  received.  The  first 
are  of  the  Law,  that  is,  the  five  books  of  Moses,  viz..  Genesis, 
Exodus,  Leviticus,  Numbers  and  Deuteronomy.  There  follow 
these  fifteen  historical  books,  viz.,  Josue,  and  the  books  of 
Judges,  or  Ruth  (as  one  of  them  is  called),  the  four  books  of 
Kings,  two  of  Paralipomenon,  Tobias,  Esther  and  Judith,  two 
of  Ezra  and  Two  of  Maccabees.  With  these  are  sixteen 
prophetic  books.  There  follow  eight  books  in  verse,  which  are 
written  in  different  kinds  of  metre  with  the  Hebrews,  that  is 
the  book  of  Job,  the  book  of  Psalms,  and  Proverbs,  Ecclesi- 
astes,  the  Canticle  of  Canticles,  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  and  the 
Lamentations  of  Jeremiah."  After  giving  the  complete  Canon 
of  the  New  Testament,  he  continues  :  "These  are  the  seventy- 
two  canonical,  books  and  on  this  account  Moses  elected  seventy 
elders  as  prophets ;  and  Jesus,  Our  Lord,  sent  seventy-two  dis- 
ciples to  preach."  The  testimony  of  Rhabanus  is  identical 
with  that  of  Isidore  of  Seville,  and  is  valuable  inasmuch  as  it 
evidences  that  the  teachers  of  the  Church  found  in  St.  Isidore 
a  concise  statement  of  the  Church's  belief.  Rhabanus  wrote 
commentaries  on  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  Judith  and  the  two 
books  of  Maccabees. 

Walafrid  Strabo,  must  also  be  added  to  the  advocates 
of  the  Catholic  Canon.* 

In  his  Glossa  Ordinaria,  he  has  adopted  the  commentaries 
of  his  master  Rhabanus  Maurus,  on  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus, 
Judith,  and  the  Maccabees ;  he  has  adopted  Bede's  com- 
mentary on  Tobias,  and  reproduces  the  text  of  Baruch  without 
commentary  with  this  preface :  "  The  book  which  is  called 
Baruch  is  not  found  in  the  Hebrew  Canon,  but  only  in  the 
Vulgate  edition,  as  also  the  Epistle  of  Jeremiah.  For  the 
knowledge  of  the  readers,  they  are  written  here,  for  they  con- 
tain many  things  relating  to  Christ,  and  the  last  times." 

The  influence  of  St.  Jerome  was  strong  in  Walafrid. 
He  has  inserted  in  his  Glossa  the  prefaces  of  St. 
Jerome  concerning  the  deuterocanonical  books.  That  these 
prefaces  find  place  in  his  work,would  not  prove  that  he  adopted 
Jerome's  views,  for  the  prefaces  are  printed  in  the  Clementine 

*Walafrid,  surnamed  Strabo,  the  squint-eyed,  was  the  disciple  of  Rha- 
banus Maurus.  He  was  born  in  806,  and  was  reared  in  the  monastery  of 
Fulda  under  Rhabanus.  He  joined  the  Benedictine  order,  became  Dean  of 
St.  Gall,  and  afterwards  Abbot  of  Richenou  in  the  diocese  of  Constance.  He 
was  a  man  renowned  for  piety  and  profound  learning.  He  died  in  849.  His 
chief  works  are  De  Offlciis,  and  Glossa  Ordinaria  in  Sacram  Scripturam. 


248  THE  CANON  OF  THE  X.  CENTURY. 

edition  of  our  own  day.  In  the  obscurity  of  the  age  when 
Walafrid  lived,  men,  with  reverence,  accepted  the  writings  of 
the  great  saints,  suspending  judgment  when  they  were  in  con- 
tradiction with  other  approved  data.  He  testifies  that  Baruch 
is  in  the  Vulgate  of  his  time,  and  that  it  contains  much  that  is 
good.  It  is  equivalent  to  say  :  "  The  Church  receives  this 
book,  but  I  know  not  what  degree  of  divinity  she  accords  it." 

With  full  right,  therefore.  Pope  Nicolas  I.,  writing  to  the 
bishops  of  Gaul  in  865,  speaks  of  the  catalogue  of  Scripture  of 
Innocent  I.  as  the  law  of  the  universal  Church  :  " — if  the  Old 
and  New  Testaments  are  to  be  received,  not  because  they  are 
to  be  found  in  a  code  of  Canons,  but  because  there  exists  a 
sentence  of  Holy  Pope  Innocent,  concerning  their  reception,  it 
follows  that  the  decretal  letters  of  Roman  Pontiffs  are  to  be  re- 
ceived, even  though  not  embodied  in  the  code  of  Canons." 
We  have  before  seen  that  the  decree  of  Innocent  I.  is  identical 
with  the  catalogue  of  the  Council  of  Trent.  Nicolas  here 
places  as  a  truth  conceded  by  all,  that  the  decree  of  Innocent 
was  the  law  of  the  Church  on  Scripture. 

In  the  tenth  century,  doubts  again  arose  in  the  Western 
Church,  founded  solely  on  the  authority  of  St.  Jerome.  On 
one  side  stood  the  use  of  the  Church  and  the  testimony  of 
tradition  ;  on  the  other,  the  declarations  of  Jerome,  the  "doctor 
of  doctors."  Hence  doubt  arose  and  uncertainty  in  many 
minds,  and  many  were  the  attempts  to  reconcile  Jerome  with 
the  belief  and  usage  of  the  Church.  These  doubts  endured 
down  to  the  time  of  the  Council  of  Trent. 

It  would  be  impossible  to  pass  in  review  over  all  the  writ- 
ings of  these  ages.  We  can  only  signalize  some  representative 
men  of  both  sides.  We  find  that  the  great  body  of  the  Church's 
teachers  preserved  the  old  belief  and  tradition,  and  the  few  who, 
through  an  excessive  adhesion  to  St.  Jerome,  broke  away  from 
the  common  belief  suffice  not  to  break  the  consensus  of  tradi- 
tion. We  find  that  most  of  those  who  follow  the  opinion  of 
Jerome  try  to  reconcile  him  with  the  Church,  by  according  to 
the  deuterocanonical  books  a  place  among  the  Holy  Books, 
just  short  of  certain  canonicity.  By  this,  they  strove  to 
harmonize  the  universal  usage  of  the  Church  with  Jerome's 
rejection  of  these  books  from  the  Canon. 

NOTKER  Balbulus  opens  the  tenth  century  with  an  un- 
favorable testimony.*     In  his  work,  De  Interpretibus  Divinae 

*Notker,  surnamed  the  stammerer,  from  his  defective  speech,  was  a  monk 
of  St.  Q«ll,  who  died  in  913.  His  life  was  passed  in  the  retirement  of  the 
cloister,  and  little  of  it  is  known  to  us.  His  chief  works  preserved  to  us  are  : 
De  Interpretibus  Divinse  Scripturse,  Liber  Sententiarum,  and  a  Martyrology. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  X.,  XI.,  AND  XII.  CENTURIES.   249 

Scripturae,  Chap.  III.,  he  has  the  following  obscure  statement : 
"  Of  the  book  which  is  called  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon,  I  have 
found  no  author's  exposition,  except  some  testimonies  (there- 
from) explained  in  relation  to  other  books.  The  book  is  totally- 
rejected  by  the  Hebrews,  and  is  by  christians  considered  uncer- 
tain, nevertheless,  since  on  account  of  the  utility  of  its  doctrine^ 
our  forefathers  were  accustomed  to  read  it,  and  the  Jews  have  it 
not,  it  is  called  with  us  Ecclesiasticus.  What  thou  believest 
of  this,  it  behooveth  thee  to  believe  also  of  the  book  of  Jesus 
the  son  of  Sirach,  except  that  this  latter  is  possessed  and  read 
by  the  Hebrews.  *  *  ^  The  priest  Bede  wrote  some 
things  on  Tobias  and  Ezra,  more  pleasing  than  necessary,  since 
he  has  striven  to  convert  simple  history  into  an  allegory. 
What  shall  I  say  of  the  books  of  Judith,  Esther  and  Para- 
lipomenon  ?  By  whom,  or  how  shall  they  be  explained,  since 
their  contents  are  not  intended  for  authority,  but  only  as  a 
memorial  of  wonderful  things?  This  thou  mayest  also  suspect 
of  the  Books  of  Maccabees."     (Patrol.  L.  Migne,  131,  996). 

There  is  no  precedent  in  the  writings  of  Jerome,  or  of  any 
one  else  for  the  opinion  of  this  monk.  It  is  the  sole  testimony 
of  one  monk  against  the  Church.  Any  testimony  that  places 
Paralipomenon  among  the  deuterocanonical  books  may  well  be 
set  aside  without  further  argument.  It  is  simply  the  case  of  a 
man,  admirable  in  other  things,  who  blundered  on  this  subject. 

In  the  collections  of  the  decrees  of  Councils  and  Popes, 
collected  in  the  tenth,  eleventh,  and  twelfth  centuries,  the 
Canon  of  Innocent  I.  or  Gelasius  always  finds  place.  The  col- 
lection of  Canons  of  the  Church  of  Spain,  published  by  Gonzalez 
from  a  Codex  of  976  contains  the  decree  of  Pope  Innocent. 

BURCHARD  OF  WORMS  (tl025),  (IVES  OF  CHARTRES  (fl  1 17), 
and  Gratianus  (fuss)  have  received  the  decree  of  Gelasius. 
These  collections  formed  the  basis  of  the  discipline  of  the 
Church,  and  show  us  plainly  the  place  given  to  the  deutero- 
canonical books  to  have  been,  in  fact,  not  inferior  to  that 
accorded  them  in  the  Church  of  to-day. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  twelfth  century,  St.  Stephan 
Harding,  Abbot  of  Citeaux,  made  a  recension  of  the  Latin 
Vulgate.  In  this  recension  of  the  year  1 109,  we  find  all  the 
books  of  the  Catholic  Canon. 

GiSLEBERT,  Abbot  of  Westminister  (fix  17),  in  his  "  Dispute 
of  A  Jew  with  A  Christian,"  defends  the  authority  of  Baruch : 
"Although  that  which  the  book  contains  is  not  found  in  the 
book  which  bears  the  name  of  Jeremiah,  nevertheless,  Jeremiah 
has  produced  the  data;  for  he  who  wrote  this  book,  wrote  not 


260         THE  CANON  OF  THE  XII.  CENTURY. 

Otherwise  than  under  the  dictation  of  Jeremiah."  (P.  L.  Migne, 
159,  1026-1027.)  Although  there  is  here  an  error  of  fact, 
nevertheless,  the  abbot  is  true  in  his  defense  of  the  authority 
of  the  book,  which  Catholic  belief  of  his  day  adopted. 

An  Anonymous  Writer  of  the  middle  of  the  twelfth 
century,  writing  upon  the  reading  of  the  Bible,  expresses  him- 
self thus  :  "  Besides  the  aforesaid  (the  protocanonical  books), 
there  are  five  books  which  are  called  by  the  Hebrews  apocry- 
phal, that  is  to  say,  hidden  and  doubtful,  but  the  Church  honors 
these  and  receives  them.  The  first  is  Wisdom  ;  the  second, 
Ecclesiasticus  ;  the  third,  Tobias  ;  the  fourth,  Judith  ;  the  fifth, 
Maccabees."     (P.    L.    Migne,    213,    714.) 

This  is  the  exact  Catholic  position,  which  endured  and  lived 
down  every  opposing  agency. 

Aegidius,  deacon  of  Paris  (fiiSo?)  sets  forth  the  Catholic 
position  on  the  Canon  in  the  following  Latin  verses: 

Qui  tamen  excipit  hos  :  Tobi,  Judith,  et  Machabaeus, 
Et  Baruch,  atque  Jesum,  pseudographumque  librum. 

Sed  licet  excepti,  tamen  hos  authenticat  usus 
Ecclesiae,  fidei  regula,  scripta  Patrum. 

Scito  quod  ista  Dei  digito  digesta  fuerunt. 
Altus  hie  est  puteus,  grandis  abyssus  inest. 

—[Patrol.  Lat.  Migne,  212,  43.] 

Peter  of  Riga,  the  friend  of  Aegidius,  endorses  the 
Catholic  Canon  in  the  following  verses  : 

"  Lex  antiqua  tenet  cum  quater  octo  decern. 

Isti  terdeni  libri  sunt  et  duodeni 
Antiquse  legis,  si  numerando  legis. 

Quinque  Moys;  Josue;  Judex;  Paralipomenon;  Job; 
Bis  bini  Regum;  Ruth;  David;  et  Salomon; 

Ezechiel;  Daniel;  Isaias;  Jeremias; 
Esdras;  Philo;  Sirach;  plena  vigore  Judith; 

Hester  amoena  genis;  Tobias;  et  Macchabaei; 
Scripta  prophetarum  sunt  duodena  simul; 

Nempe  Neemise  dedit  hospitium  liber  Esdrse; 
Et  Ruth  judicibus  hospita  facta  subest; 

Scriptorisque  sui  Baruch  librum  Jeremias 
Post  libri  recipit  posteriora  sui." — [P.  L.  Migne,  212,  23.] 

In  this  testimony,  Peter  adopted  the  erroneous  opinion  of 
some  that  Wisdom  was  written  by  Philo,  the  Jew ;  but  the 
value  of  his  opinion  is  not  impaired  by  this  error  since,  in  such 
opinion,  he  is  not  a  witness  of  the  Church's  belief. 

Peter  of  Blois  (ti2oo)  adopts  the  following  testimony 
verbatim  from  St.  Isidore  of  Seville  :  "  There  is  a  fourth  order 
with  us  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  of  the  books  that 
are  not  in  the  Hebrew  Canon,  the  first  of  these  is  Wisdom  ;  the 
second,  Ecclesiasticus;  the  third,  Tobias ;  the  fourth,  Judith  ; 


THE   CANON  OF  THE  XII.  CENTURY.  251 

the  fifth  and  sixth,  Maccabees.  These  books,  the  Jews  place 
apart  among  the  apocrypha ;  but  the  Church  of  Christ  honors 
them  among  the  divine  books  and  promulgates  them." 
(P.  L.  Migne,  207, 1052.)  This  may  be  called  the  common  opinion 
of  the  time.  It  is  always  enunciated  with  the  certainty  and  bold- 
ness of  men  conscious  that  they  have  no  adversary  among  the 
teachers  of  the  Church.  It  is  never  challenged,  never  denied  : 
those  who  depart  from  it,  at  most,  only  try  to  pare  away  a 
little  of  the  equality  of  the  books  of  the  second  Canon,  to  be 
in  line  with  Jerome. 

HONORIUS,  the  celebrated  theologian  of  Autun  (f  1120?)  in 
his  Gemma  Animae,  Chap.  118,  establishes  the  mode  in  which 
the  Holy  Books  are  to  be  read  in  the  divine  office,  in  which 
testimony,  he  has  the  following :  "  These  books  are  authentic, 
and  these  are  to  be  read  in  the  divine  offices ....  From  the 
Kalends  of  August  up  to  September,  let  there  be  read  the 
Parables  of  Solomon,  Ecclesiastes,  The  Canticle  of  Canticles, 
and  The  Book  of  Wisdom,  all  of  which  Solomon  wrote,  and 
Ecclesiasticus,  which  Jesus  the  Son  of  Sirach  composed.  From 
the  Kalends  of  September,  for  two  weeks,  let  there  be  read  the 
book  of  Job,  which  he  composed ;  then  for  a  week,  the  book 
of  Tobias,  which  he  wrote.  Then  for  a  week,  let  there  be  read 
the  book  of  Judith,  which  she  or  Achior  wrote ....  From  the 
Kalends  of  October  to  the  Kalends  of  November,  let  there  be 
read  the  books  oi  Maccabees ;  the  first  of  which,  Simon  the 
pontifex  wrote,  and  its  last  part  John  his  son  is  said  to  have 
written ;  but  the  second  book,  Philo,  the  Jew,  taught  by  the 
Greeks,    is  known  to  have    written."       (P.  L.    Migne,    172, 

736-737-) 

In  these  testimonies   Baruch  is  not  explicitly  mentioned, 

because  it  was  always  considered  a  part  of  Jeremiah.     It  is 

evident  that  this  theologian   is  not  advancing  an  individual 

opinion  here,  but  practically  ordering  the  reading  of  books 

which  the  Church  read  as  Holy  Scripture.     His  opinion  of  the 

authorship  of  the  second  book  of  Maccabees  is  worthless,  since 

there  he  is  not  a  witness,  but  a  critic,  and  a  very  poor  one  in 

this  case. 

John   Beleth,    the   theologian   of    Paris    (1180),    in   his 

Rationale  Divinorum  Officiarum,  establishes  the  same  order  of 

reading  of  the  Scriptures.* 

*Novem  quae  deinceps  sequuntur,  reputantur  hagiographa,  ita  tamen  ut 
sint  authentica,  nimirum  liber  Psalmorum,  liber  Jobi,  tres  libri  Salomonis, 
scilicet  Parabolse,  sive  mavis  dicere  Proverbia,  Ecclesiastes  et  Canticum  Canti- 
corum,  liber  Paralipomenon,  Judith  et  Esther.     Quatuor  tandem  enumerant 


262         THE  CANON  OF  THE  XII.  CENTURY. 

Peter  Comestor  (fn/S)  has  a  testimony  favorable  to  us.* 
In  the  history  of  the  book  of  Josue,  praef.,  he  has  the  follow- 
ing: "Job,  David,  three  books  of  Solomon,  Daniel,  Paralipo- 
menon,  Ezra,  Esther,  Sapientia,  Ecclesiasticus,  Judith,  Tobias, 
Maccabees  are  called  the  Hagiographa  (al.  Apocrypha),  be- 
cause their  author  is  unknown ;  but,  since  there  is  no  doubt  of 
their  truth,  they  are  received  by  the  Church."  (P.  L.  Migne, 
198,  1260.)  Great  confusion  exists  in  this  age,  in  the  use  of 
Hagiographa,  and  Apocrypha.  Many  confounded  these  terms, 
as  this  author  did  here,  if  the  text  of  Migne  is  right.  They 
seem  to  have  wished  to  reconcile  Jerome  with  the  Church  by 
attributing  to  the  word  apocryphal,  the  sense  of  a  book,  whose 
message  was  received  by  the  Church,  but  whose  author  was 
unknown. 

A  peculiar  testimony  is  found  in  that  part  of  Peter's  history 
which  treats  of  the  history  of  the  Book  of  Daniel.  In  the 
XIII.  Chapter  he  states:  "There  follows  the  history  of  Sus- 
anna, which  the  Hebrew  (text)  does  not  contain  in  the  Book 
of  Daniel.  It  calls  it  a  fable,  not  that  it  denies  the  history, 
but  because  it  is  falsely  stated  there,  that  the  priests  were 
stoned,  whom  Jeremias  testifies  to  have  been  burned  ;  and  be- 
cause we  fable  it  to  have  been  written  by  Daniel,  whereas  it 
was  written  by  a  certain  Greek."  The  loose  ideas  of  inspira- 
tion then  prevailing,  made  it  possible  for  this  uncritical  mind 
to  believe  that  historical  falsehood  could  exist  in  Scripture. 

A  testimony  unfavorable  to  the  Book  of  Wisdom  is  found 
in  the  writings  of  Rupert,  Abbot  of  Deutz.f  In  his  Com- 
mentary on  Genesis,  Chap.  XXXI.,  he  denies  the  canonicity  of 

apocrypha,  librum  videlicet  Tobiae,  Machabseorum,  Philonis,  cujus  principium 
est :  Diligite  juBtitiam,  et  Jesu  filii  Sirach,  qui  sic  incipit :  Omnia  sapientia  a 
Domino,  etc.,  appellaturque  etiam  Ecclesiasticus.  Verum  hos  quatuor 
quidam  non  recipiunt.  Ecclesia  tamen  eos  approbat,  quod  argumentum  fere 
habeant  librorum  Salomonis,  etiamsi  eorum  auctores  pro  certo  ac  vere  non 
sciat.     [P.  L.  Migne,  202,  66.] 


*Peter,  surnamed  Comestor,  low  latin  for  an  eater,  a  gourmand,  was  of 
Troyes  in  France.  He  was  called  Comestor,  the  eater,  to  signify  that  he  had 
devoured  all  the  erudition  of  his  time,  or  from  the  fact  of  his  prodigious  mem- 
ory of  Scripture.  His  best  work  is  his  Scholastic  History,  from  which  he 
merited  to  be  called  the  Master  of  history. 


fRupert  of  Deutz  was  born  in  the  territory  of  Ipres.  He  entered  the 
Benedictine  Order  in  the  Abbey  of  St.  Lawrence  near  Liege.  He  passed 
thence  to  the  Abbey  of  St  Lawrence  of  Oosbourg,  near  Utrecht.  His  great 
piety  and  deep  knowledge  of  the  Scriptures  moved  Frederic,  Archbishop  of 
Cologne,  to  make  him  Abbot  of  Deutz  near  Cologne,  where  he  died  in  1135. 
He  has  left  numerous  works,  principal  of  which  is  his  Commentary  on  Holy 
Scripture. 


THE   CANON   OF   THE  XII.   CENTURY.  253 

Wisdom  :  "  Concerning  whom  (Adam),  whether  he  ever  ob- 
tained through  Christ  mercy,  by  which  we  are  saved  and  freed, 
certain  ones  in  these  days  discuss,  for  the  reason  that  nowhere 
does  the  canonical  Scripture  testify  that  he  did  penance.  Only 
in  the  book,  which  bears  the  title  of  Wisdom,  it  is  thus  written 
concerning  him  :  '  She  (Wisdom)  preserved  him,  that  was  the 
first  formed  by  God,  the  father  of  the  world,  when  he  was 
created  alone,  and  she  brought  him  out  of  his  sin,  and  gave  him 
power  to  govern  all  things.  (Sap.  X.  i — 2).  But  this  Scrip- 
ture is  not  of  the  canon,  nor  is  that  sentence  taken  from  canonical 
Scripture.  *  *  *  What,  therefore,  is  therein  said :  '  She 
brought  him  out  of  his  sin,  and  gave  him  power  to  govern 
all  things,'  is  more  readily  rejected  than  received."  (P.  L. 
Migne,  167,  318). 

In  his  Commentary  on  Jeremiah,  Rupert  mentions  not 
Baruch,  (Ibid.);  and  he  omits  all  the  deuterocanonical  frag- 
ments from  Daniel,  (Ibid.)  In  his  work  De  Divinis  Officiis, 
he  renders  clear  testimony  that  all  the  deuterocanonical 
books  were  read  side  by  side  with  the  books  of  the  first 
canon  as  divine  Scripture,  and  then  throws  a  doubt  on  Tobias 
and  Judith:  "These  two  volumes  are  not  in  the  canon  with 
the  Hebrews,  but,  on  the  authority  of  the  Nicene  Synod,  they 
are  adopted  for  the  instruction  of  the  Church."  (P.  L. 
Migne,  170,  332). 

In  his  work,  De  Victoria  Verbi  Dei,  speaking  of  the 
causes  of  Aman's  wrath,  as  set  forth  in  the  deuterocanonical 
Twelfth  Chapter  of  Esther,  he  contrasts  the  data  with  the  pro- 
tocanonical  Third  Chapter  of  the  same  book,  saying :  "  But  a 
greater  and  more  certain  cause  of  this  hate  and  great  wrath  is 
that  which  the  truth  of  Scripture  asserts  thus  :  '  Mardochai 
alone  did  not  bend  the  knee  and  adore  Aman.'  "  (P.  L. 
Migne,  169,  1384. 

It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  the  deuterocanonical  data 
are  not  ranked  as  the  truth  of  Scripture.  On  the  same 
work  from  the  Seventh  to  the  Twenty-sixth  Chapter,  Rupert 
discourses  on  the  books  of  Maccabees,  which  he  clearly  recog- 
nizes as  divine  Scripture.     (P.  L.  Migne,  169,  1428 — 1442). 

We  find  in  Rupert  a  man  strongly  imbued  with  the  opinions 
of  Jerome,  of  whose  writings  he  had  been  an  assiduous  reader. 
Jerome  was  the  classical  authority  of  those  days  on  Scripture, 
and  it  is  not  strange  that  Rupert,  his  disciple,  should  have 
adopted  some  of  his  opinions.  Like  his  master,  he  is  not  con- 
sistent, and  in  his  practical  use  of  Scripture  regularly  quotes 
the  deuterocanonical  books  as  divine   Scripture.     He  breaks 


254  THE   CANON   OF  THE  XII.  CENTURY. 

away  from  the  common  voice  of  tradition,  when  he  denies  the 
divinity  of  the  same.  It  was  only  the  safeguarding  power  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  acting  through  the  Church,  that  saved  these 
books  against  the  authority  of  Jerome,  who  was  the  great 
authority  on  Scripture  in  the  middle  age.  This  protection  of 
God  permitted  an  occasional  word  against  the  divinity  of  the 
aforesaid  books. 

Hugh  of  St.  Victor  also  adopts  the  opinions  of  the  Pro- 
logus  Galeatus*  In  his  prefatory  remarks,  De  Scripturis  et 
Scriptoribus  Sacris,  after  giving  the  list  of  the  protocanonical 
books,  he  continues :  "All,  therefore,  make  twenty-two.  There 
are  besides  certain  other  books,  as  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon, 
the  Book  of  Jesus  the  Son  of  Sirach,  The  Book  of  Judith, 
Tobias,  and  the  Maccabees,  which  are  read,  but  are  not  written  in 
the  Canon y 

After  enumerating  the  books  of  the  New  Testament, 
the  decretals  of  Popes,  and  the  writings  of  the  Fathers, 
among  whom  the  first  in  place  is  Jerome,  he  continues :  "  But 
these  writings  of  Fathers  are  not  computed  in  the  text  of  the 
divine  Scriptures,  just  as  we  have  said  that  there  are  books 
which  are  not  embodied  in  the  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament, 
and  yet  are  read,  as  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon  and  other  books. 
The  text,  therefore,  of  Holy  Scripture,  as  one  body,  is  princi- 
pally made  up  of  thirty  books.  Of  these  twenty-two  books 
are  comprised  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  eight  in  the  New, 
(Hugh  made  one  book  of  the  thirteen  Epistles  of  Paul,  and 
another  book  of  all  the  Catholic  Epistles).  The  other  writings 
are,  as  it  were,  adjuncts,  and  deductions  from  the  foregoing." 
(P.  L.  Migne,  175,  15-16.) 

In  his  Prologue,  De  Sacramentis,  he  manifests  the  same 
views :  "  There  are,  besides,  in  the  Old  Testament  certain  other 
books,  which  are  read,  indeed,  but  are  not  within  the  Corpus 
Scripturarutn,  or  in  the  authentic  Canon.  These  are  Tobias, 
Judith,  Maccabees,  and  that  which  is  inscribed  the  Wisdom  of 
Solomon,  and  Ecclesiasticus." 

Hugh  is  also  a  Jeromist  of  a  pronounced  type.  All  that 
the  Church  had  done  up  to  his  time  was  to  place  these  books 
before  the  faithful  as  Scripture.  She  had  not  defined  the 
exact  degree  of  their  inspiration.  It  is  only  concerning  this 
degree  of   inspiration   that   Hugh   errs.     He  testifies  to  the 

*Hugh  of  St.  Victor  was  Canon  regular  of  St.  Victor  at  Paris.  His 
origin  is  controverted.  So  great  was  his  fame  in  theology  in  Paris  that  men 
called  him  the  second  Aiiguttine.  He  died  in  1140  at  the  age  of  forty -four 
years. 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   XII.  CENTURY.  255 

presence  of  the  books  in  the  divine  deposit.  The  degree  of 
their  inspiration  was  yet  an  open  question;  in  judging  of  this 
degree,  he  went  with  his  great  master  Jerome,  and  excluded 
the  books  of  the  second  Canon  from  an  equality  with  the  first. 
The  authority  of  Hugh  of  St.  Victor  was  great  in  the  Church  ; 
and,  doubtless,  he  contributed  much  to  keep  up  the  uncertainty 
which  was  finally  removed  by  the  Council  of  Trent.  It  was 
not  with  those  writers  a  question  of  the  rejection  of  the  deu- 
terocanonical  books  ;  these  books  had  a  place  in  the  deposit  of 
the  sacred  literature  of  the  Church,  but  it  was  a  question  of 
equality  with  the  other  books  ;  and  on  this  point,  some  limited 
the  authority  of  the  books  to  something  less  than  Canonicity. 

Rudolph  of  Flavigny  (fuss),  divides  the  books  of 
Scripture  into  four  classes,  historical,  prophetical,  books  of 
proverbs,  and  books  of  simple  doctrine.  He  places  Wisdom 
and  Ecclesiasticus  with  protocanonical  books  in  the  fourth 
class,  but  declares  that  "  Tobias,  Judith  and  Maccabees, 
although  read  for  the  instruction  of  the  Church,  have  not  per- 
fect authority."* 

That  the  books  should  be  read  in  the  Chnrch,  this  was  the 
Church's  work,  infallible  and  uniform  ;  she  preserved  them  for 
her  children,  because  they  were  divine :  the  fluctuation  of  in- 
dividual opinions  regarding  their  exact  degree  of  inspiration, 
was  the  work  of  man.  As  long  as  the  main  point,  the  deliver- 
ance of  the  message  of  these  books  to  the  people,  was  safe- 
guarded, the  Church  could  permit  the  conflict  of  individual 
opinions  in  the  speculative  order,  till,  in  her  own  good  time,  she 
declared  authoritatively  what  character  she  had  always  given 
to  these  books. 

Peter  of  Cluny,  surnamed  the  Venerable,  is  by  some 
quoted  as  an  adversary  of  the  deuterocanonical  books.f 
In  his  letter  againt  Peter  of  Bruys  and  his  sect,  called  the 
Petrobrusiani,  after  enumerating  the  protocanonical  books,  he 
continues :  "  There  remain  besides  these  authentic  books  of 
Holy  Scripture  six  other  books  which  are  not  to  be  passed 
over  in  silence,  viz.,    Wisdom,  the  book  of  Jesus  Son  of  Sirach, 

*Radulphi  Flaviacensis  in  Levit.  XIV.  I.  (Biblioth.  Max.  Patrum, 
Lugduni,  1667,  Tom.  VII.  177.     The  work  is  not  in  Migne's  collection.) 

f Peter,  the  Venerable,  entered  the  order  of  the  Monks  of  Cluny,  and  in 
1121  became  general  of  the  order.  His  great  piety  and  learning  placed  him 
in  this  post  at  the  age  of  28  years.  Abelard  found  an  asylum  with  him,  and 
was  moved  by  him  to  retract  his  errors.  Peter  was  indefatigable  in  combat- 
ing the  errors  that  arose  in  France  at  that  time.  He  merits  to  be  named 
with  St.  Bernard  as  one  of  the  foremost  churchmen  of  that  age.     In  defense 


266  THE   CANON   OF   THE   XII.  CENTURY. 

Tobias,  Judith,  and  the  two  books  of  Maccabees.  Although 
these  do  not  reach  the  sublime  dignity  of  the  preceding, 
nevertheless,  on  account  of  their  laudable  and  very  necessary 
doctrine,  they  have  merited  to  be  received  by  the  Church.  There 
is  no  need  that  I  should  labor  in  commending  these  to  you. 
For  if  ye  value  the  Church  in  any  wise,  ye  will  receive  some- 
thing, at  least  a  little,  on  her  authority.  But  if  (as  Christ  said 
to  Moses  of  the  Jews)  ye  will  not  believe  Christ's  Church  how 
will  ye  believe  my  words?"     (P.  L.  Migne,  i88,  751). 

Viewed  in  a  proper  light,  this  text  has  nothing  unfavorable 
to  the  complete  Canon.  Peter  is  arguing  with  men  who 
boasted  that  they  received  only  the  Gospels,  and  he  asks  them 
to  receive  the  other  books  on  the  authority  of  the  Church. 
There  is  a  perfect  accord  in  all  these  exponents  of  Catholic 
thought  in  stating  that  the  Church  received  the  deuterocanoni- 
cal  books.  The  only  difference  of  opinion  that  existed,  re- 
garded the  rank  and  dignity  of  these  books.  They  received 
and  used  them ;  some  of  these  writers  hesitated  to  pronounce 
the  last  word  regarding  the  Canonicity  of  these  books,  because 
the  Church  had  not  yet  defined  the  question.  That  Peter,  the 
Venerable,  in  limiting  the  dignity  of  these  books,  did  not  deny 
their  divine  inspiration,  is  evident  from  his  copious  quota- 
tations  from  all  of  them,  as  divine  Scripture.  Witness  a  few 
examples.  In  the  aforesaid  treatise,  speaking  of  the  Book  of 
Maccabees,  he  declares :  "  But  of  Judas  Maccabaeus,  the  ex- 
cellent leader  of  the  Hebrews,  the  truthful  Scripture  commem- 
orates that,  after  the  destruction  of  the  pagan  army,  he  took 
the  sword  of  the  general  Apollonius  whom  he  had  slain,  and 
fought  with  it  all  his  days."     I.  Maccab.  III. 

In  the  same  treatise,  he  establishes  from  the  II.  of  Macca- 
bees, "that  it  is  a  holy  thought  to  pray  for  the  dead,  that  they 
may  be  released  from  their  sins."     II.  Maccab.  XII.  46. 

In  his  Thirty-fourth  Epistle,  quoting  the  sixth  verse  of  the 
twenty-second  chapter  of  Ecclesiasticus,  he  says :  "  That 
divine  philospher  saith :  *  A  tale  out  of  time  is  like  music  in 
mourning.'  " 

of  his  order,  he  opposed  St.  Bernard,  who  reproached  the  order  for  their 
worldliness,  and  sumptuousness  in  their  buildings  and  table.  These  vices 
wrought  their  downfall,  and  they  shamelessly  bartered  the  rights  of  the 
Church  to  the  revolutionists  for  secularization.  Peter  died  at  his  monastery 
in  1156.  There  are  preserved  of  his  writings  six  books  of  Letters,  a  Treatise 
on  The  Divinity  of  Christ,  a  Treatise  against  the  Jews,  a  Treatise  on  Infant 
Baptism  against  Peter  of  Bruys,  a  Treatise  on  The  Authority  of  the  Church, 
Treatises  on  The  Basilicas,  The  Churches,  and  The  Altars,  etc. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  XH.  CENTURY.         257 

In  his  treatise  against  the  Jews,  Chapter  11. ,  he  proves  the 
divinity  of  Christ  from  the  authority  of  Baruch  :  "And  although 
these  things  should  suffice  to  prove  the  divinity  of  Christ  to 
even  brute  beasts,  let  the  Prophet  or  prophetic  man  come 
forth,  Baruch  the  notary  or  colleague  of  Jeremiah.  Let  him 
come  forth,  and,  although  he  draws  his  spirit  from  another, 
nevertheless,  it  is  from  the  prophetic  heart  of  Jeremiah,  and 
therefore  as  of  one  spirit  with  the  Prophet,  let  him  state,  not 
in  enigmas,  but  lucidly  and  openly,  what  he  thinks  of  the 
divinity  of  Christ.  This  man  manifestly,  after  many  things 
said  of  God,  adds :  '  This  is  our  God,  and  there  shall  be  no  other 
be  accounted  of  in  comparison  of  him.  He  found  out  all  the 
way  of  knowledge,  and  gave  it  to  Jacob,  his  servant,  and  to 
Israel  his  beloved.  Afterwards,  he  was  seen  upon  earth,  and 
conversed    with    men.'"     Baruch    III.    36-38. 

In  the  same  treatise.  Chapter  IV.,  he  declares  thus:  "  Who 
is  it  that  in  a  certain  one  of  your  books  speaks  by  the 
wise  man  :  *  My  memory  is  unto  everlasting  generations  ' 
(Eccli.  XXIV.  28)?  Is  it  not  God  ?  Verily  it  is  God."  The 
Council  of  Trent  asks  no  more  than  is  substantially  declared 
in  these  passages,  and  by  its  everlasting  sanction,  it  has  made 
Canonical  the  books  that  Peter  considered  divine. 

John  of  Salisbury  follows  Jerome  on  the  Canon.*  In 
Epistola  CXLIII.  he  declares  thus :  "  Since,  therefore,  con- 
cerning the  number  of  the  books,  I  read  many  and  different 
opinions  of  the  Fathers,  following  Jerome,  a  doctor  of  the 
Catholic  Church,  whom  I  hold  most  approved  in  establishing 
foundations  of  Scripture,  I  firmly  believe  that,  as  there  are 
twenty-two  Hebrew  letters,  thus  there  are  twenty-two  books  of 
the  Old  Testament,  arranged  in  three  orders  *  *  And  these  are 
found  in  the  Prologue  to  the  Book  of  Kings  which  Jerome 
called  the  Galeatum  Principium  of  all  Scripture  *  *  But  the 
Book  of  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  Judith,  Tobias,  and  Pastor,  as 
the  same  Father  asserts,  are  not  in  the  Canon,  neither  is  the  book 
of  Maccabees,  which  is  divided  in  two."     (P.  L.  199;  125,  126.) 

*Jolin  of  Salisbury  receives  his  name  from  his  birthplace  in  England. 
The  date  of  his  birth  is  about  1110.  He  was  sent  to  France  to  study,  and  was 
afterwards  sent  by  the  King  of  England  to  the  papal  court,  to  manage  the 
interests  of  England  there.  Recalled  to  England,  he  was  advanced  to  high 
offices  by  the  High  Chancellor,  Thomas  A.  Becket.  John  became  inseparably 
attached  to  Becket,  and  went  with  him  when  Becket  was  made  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury.  He  tried  to  defend  him  against  the  murderers  sent  by  Henry  II. , 
and  parried  the  first  blow  aimed  at  Becket's  head,  by  receiving  it  on  his  arm. 
John  was  subsequently  made  bishop  of  Chartres,  which  charge  he  filled 
faithfully  and  well.  He  was  one  of  the  finest  spirits  of  his  age,  a  man  of  deep 
piety  and  learning.  He  died  in  1180.  He  has  left  many  works,  principal 
among  which  is  Polycraticus  or  the  Vanities  of  the  Court. 

Q 


268  THE  CANON  OF  THE  XIII.  CENTURY. 

In  the  same  work,  he  speaks  again  of  the  deuterocanonical 
books  thus:  "Concerning  Tobias,  Judith,  and  the  Book  of 
Maccabees,  which  are  not  received  in  the  Canon,  by  whom 
they  were  written,  the  common  opinion  does  not  teach  us, 
neither  do  the  followers  of  Philo  mention  them  ;  but  since  they 
build  up  faith  and  religion,  they  are  piously  admitted.  Philo 
wrote  the  Book  of  Wisdom,  and  it  is  called  Pseudographus ; 
not  that  he  wrote  falsely,  but  because  he  falsely  entitled  it ; 
for  it  is  called  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon,  whereas,  it  was  not 
written  by  Solomon,  but  is  called  of  Solomon,  on  account  of 
its  style  and  excellent  moral  teaching,  Jesus  Son  of  Sirach 
wrote  Ecclesiasticus,  which  also,  from  the  similarity  of  its  style 
and  moral  teaching,  is  called  Solomon's." 

The  practice  of  John  of  Salisbury  is  in  direct  opposition  to 
his  theory  here  announced.  His  works  are  full  of  quotations 
from  the  deuterocanonical  Scriptures  as  divine  Scripture.  He 
was  infected  by  a  sort  of  hero  worship  towards  St.  Jerome, 
somewhat  similar  to  that  which  in  our  own  day  set  in  towards 
St.  Thomas,  which  is  in  itself  neither  to  the  glory  of  the  saint, 
nor  conformable  to  the  truth.  Without  sufficient  depth  or 
critical  acumen  to  penetrate  the  question  and  form  a  compre- 
hensive judgment  of  it,  John  paid  a  blind  allegiance  to  his 
master,  and,  at  the  same  time,  made  much  use  of  these  very 
same  books  as  Scripture.  Jurare  in  verba  magistri  was  the 
motto  of  these  schoolmen,  and  often  they  extolled  the  opin- 
ions of  the  master  over  the  voice  of  tradition.  The  error 
of  John,  then,  is  due  to  defect  of  proper  investigation,  and  to 
an  excessive  addiction  to  the  opinions  of  St.  Jerome. 

Chapter  XI. 

The  Canon  in  the  Church   from  the  Beginning  of 
Thirteenth  Century  to  Council  of  Trent. 

Throughout  this  epoch,  the  Bible  of  the  Church  contained 
the  protocanonical  and  deuterocanonical  books,  without  any 
indication  of  difference  them.  This  truth  is  clearly  proven  by 
the  many  manuscripts  existing  of  this  period.  Whether  the 
work  of  chaptering  the  Bible  were  done  by  Hugh  of  St.  Caro 
or  by  Stephen  Langton  is  uncertain,  but  it  extended  to  all  the 
books  of  the  Catholic  Canon,  and  the  Correctoria  of  this  period 
also  embrace  the  books  of  both  classes. 

Albertus  Magnus,  in  his  exposition  of  the  Prologue  of 
St.  Jerome  on  Baruch,  manifestly  defends  the  divinity  of  the 


THE   CANON   OF  THE   XIII.  CENTURY.  269 

book.*  Commenting  the  words  of  Jerome :  "  The  Book  of 
Baruch,  the  secretary  of  Jeremiah,  which  is  not  read  by  the 
Hebrews,  nor  possessed  by  them,  etc.,"  Albert  endeavors  by 
scholastic  subtlety  to  benignly  interpret  Jerome  :  "  Neverthe- 
less, the  truth  of  the  book  is  not  thereby  called  in  question, 
because  it  is  joined  to  canonical  Scripture.  For  it  contains 
nothing  except  what  was  enunciated  by  Jeremiah,  and  for  this 
reason,  it  is  united  in  the  same  truth  with  the  Prophet  Jere- 
miah. For  the  Hebrews  compute  twenty-two  books  in  the 
Canon  of  Scripture,  in  accordance  with  the  twenty-two  letters 
of  their  alphabet ;  or  twenty-four  books,  corresponding  to  the 
twenty-four  ancients.  But  the  added  books  they  reckon  in  the 
same  number,  as  Baruch  is  added  to  Jeremiah,  for  the  reason 
that  he  received  from  Jeremiah  whatever  he  wrote,  *  *  *  so 
that  the  whole  truth  of  this  Scripture  rests  on  the  revelation 
of  God  made  to  Jeremiah." 

Whatever  be  the  defects  of  this  data,  it  is  evident  that 
Albert  is  an  avowed  advocate  of  the  deuterocanonical  books. 
He  quotes  from  all  of  them  in  his  works,  assigning  them 
equal  place  with  the  books  of  the  first  Canon. 

St.  Bonaventure  comprises  all  the  protocanonical  and 
deuterocanonical  books  in  twenty-six  books.f 

*Albert  was  bom  at  Lauingen,  in  Suabia,  about  the  close  of  the  twelfth 
century.  He  was  descended  from  the  Counts  of  BoUstaedt.  He  studied  at 
Padua,  and  in  1223  entered  the  Dominican  Order  at  Cologne.  His  life  was 
given  to  teaching  in  the  schools  and  preaching.  In  1254,  he  was  made  pro- 
vincial of  the  Dominicans  of  Germany ;  and  in  1260,  Bishop  of  Ratisbonne. 
He  renounced  the  bishopric  for  the  monk's  cell,  and  died  at  Cologne  in  1280. 
The  saying  of  Cicero  could  be  applied  to  Albert,  that  he  had  left  writings 
enough  to  cremate  his  body.  But  his  works  are  more  vast  than  solid  ;  they 
manifest  indefatigable  toil  in  reading  and  collating  the  works  of  others, 
rather  than  profundity  of  personal  thought :  the  pompous  verbiage  of 
the  schoolmen,  and  excessive  mysticism  characterize  them  throughout.  It 
was  remarked  of  Albert  by  a  French  writer,  that  he  was  called  great,  only 
because  he  lived  in  an  age  when  men  were  little.  He  is  withal  a  good  witness 
of  the  tradition  of  his  times. 


f  The  secular  name  of  St.  Bonaventure  was  John  Fidanza.  He  was  bom 
at  Bagnorea,  in  Italy,  in  1221.  He  entered  the  Franciscan  Order  at  the  age 
of  seventeen  years.  He  studied  at  the  University  of  Paris  under  the  cele- 
brated Alexander  Hales.  Bonaventure  rose  by  his  merit  to  be  called  the 
Seraphic  Doctor,  one  of  the  greatest  doctors  of  the  Church.  In  1257,  he  was 
made  general  of  his  order,  and  in  1272,  Gregory  X.  created  him  Cardinal  and 
Bishop  of  Albano.  He  was  one  of  the  first  theologians  of  the  Council  of 
Lyon,  but  he  died  after  the  first  session  in  1274.  He  has  left  voluminous 
works,  more  than  twenty  of  which  treat  of  Sacred  Scripture.  His  works  are 
characterized  by  a  moderation  and  wisdom,  resembling  that  found  in  the 
works  of  John  Chrysostom. 


260        THE  CANON   OF  THE   XIII.  AND  XIV.  CENTURIES. 

He  evidences  in  many  ways  that  he  held  the  books  in  equal 
esteem.  In  the  preface  to  his  Commentary  on  Wisdom,  he 
says  :  "  The  efficient  cause  of  the  book  is  threefold  :  Gdd  who 
inspired  it,  Solomon  who  produced  it,  and  Philo  who  com- 
piled it."  His  works  evince  that  he  held  the  like  opinion  of 
the  other  deuterocanonical  books. 

Alexander  Neckam,  professor  at  the  University  of  Paris 
at  the  commencement  of  the  thirteenth  century,  wrote  a  com- 
mentary on  the  difficult  passages  of  Holy  Scripture,  and  in- 
cludes the  books  of  both  classes  in  the  same  category. 

Robert  Holkot  (fi34o),  a  learned  Dominican  of 
Northampton  in  England,  is  bold  in  favor  of  the  deutero- 
canonical books.  "  St.  Augustine,"  he  says,  "  expressly  de- 
clares in  his  Christian  Doctrine  (H.  8)  that  the  Book  of 
Wisdom  should  be  enumerated  in  the  Sacred  Scriptures ;  for, 
enumerating  the  books  of  the  Canon  and  the  Bible,  he  says 
thus  of  Wisdom  and  Ecclesiasticus  :  *  Wisdom  and  Ecclesias- 
ticus,  since  they  have  merited  to  be  received  in  authority,  are 
reckoned  among  the  prophetic  books.'  Wherefore,  it  is  evident 
that  the  book  ( Wisdom)  is  counted  among  the  Canonical  Scrip- 
tures in  the  Church,  though  the  contrary  is  held  by  the  Jews 
*  *  *  and  therefore,  although  by  the  Jews  rejected,  the  books 
are  of  great  authority  among  the  faithful."* 

Thomas  Netter,  better  known  as  Thomas  Waldensis, 
from  his  birthplace  Walden  in  England,  a  Carmelite  of  such 
learning  that  he  was  sent  by  Henry  IV.  of  England  to  the 
Councils  of  Pisa  and  Florence,  maintains  stoutly  in  his  Doctrin- 
ale  Fidei  that  the  canonicity  of  a  book  must  be  determined  by 
the  authority  of  the  Church.  He  appeals  against  the  followers 
of  Wicklef  to  the  Decree  of  Gelasius,  to  establish  the  books  that 
are  to  be  held  in  full  authority. 

John  of  Ragusa  (ti450)  a  Domenican  doctor  of  the 
Sorbonne,  who  was  president  of  the  Council  of  Basle,  announces 
in  no  doubtful  terms,  in  the  aforesaid  council,  the  doctrine  of 
the  Church :  "  Moreover,  it  is  manifest  that  there  are  many 
books  in  the  Bible,  which  are  not  held  in  authority  with  the 
Jews,  but  are  by  them  reckoned  apocryphal,  which,  nevertheless, 
by  us  are  held  in  the  same  veneration  and  authority  as  the 
others,  and  our  acceptance  of  them  rests  on  nothing  but  the 
tradition  and  acceptance  of  the  whole  Catholic  Church,  which 
it  is  not  lawful  to  pertinaciously  contradict."f     The  voice  of 

*Postilla  super  lib.  Sapientiae,  Cap.  I.  Sect.  2. 


fMansi.  CoU.  Council.    XXIX.,  p.  885. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  XIII.  AND  XIV.   CENTURIES.        261 

the  Church  speaks  through  this  man,  which  spoke  again 
through  the  Fathers  of  the  Council  of  Trent. 

St.  Thomas  Aquinas  (ti274)  does  not  treat  the  question 
of  the  canonicity  of  the  deuterocanonical  books  ex  professo. 
He  is  falsely,  however,  placed  by  some  protestants,  as  an  adver- 
sary of  these  books. 

A  just  way  to  judge  of  a  man's  opinion  of  Scripture  is  by 
his  practical  use  of  it.  In  his  Summa  Theologica  St.  Thomas 
has  quoted  Baruch  twice  ;  I.  Maccabees,  more  than  twelve 
times  ;  II.  Maccabees  more  than  fifty-two  times  ;  Judith,  more 
than  nineteen  times  ;  Tobias,  more  than  seventy  times  ;  Wis- 
dom, more  than  one  hundred  and  twelve  times  ;  and  Ecclesias- 
ticus,  more  than  one  hundred  and  thirteen  times. 

The  protestant  Hody  endeavors  to  shake  St.  Thomas' 
authority  in  favor  of  the  deuterocanonical  books  by  the  three 
following  testimonies.  In  his  seventh  opusculum.  Chapter  IV., 
commenting  the  work  of  the  pseudo  Areopagite  De  Divinis 
Nominibus,  St.  Thomas  speaks  of  a  quotation  from  Wisdom 
thus  :  "  From  which  it  is  evident  that  Wisdom  was  not  yet 
held  (nondum  habebatur)  among  the  canonical  Scriptures." 
That  this  testimony  is  not  unfavorable  to  our  case  is  evident 
from  a  mere  reading.  But  we  hope  to  show  that  it  is  a  direct 
testimony  in  favor  of  the  books.  If  there  is  any  point  to  the 
declaration,  in  saying  that  at  a  certain  period  a  book  was  not 
yet,  nondum,  in  the  canonical  Scriptures,  the  writer  supposes 
that  at  his  writing  it  was  there. 

The  second  text  objected  against  us  is  from  the  Summa 
Theologica,  I.  Q.  89,  art.  8,  ad  2.  There,  commenting  on  the 
apparition  of  Samuel  to  Saul  (I.  Sam.  XXVIII.  11  et  seqq.  et 
Eccli.  XLVI.  23),  he  answers  the  objection  first  by  the  author- 
ity of  Ecclesiasticus,  and  then  subjoins  ;  "  Whence  it  can  be 
said  of  Samuel  that  he  appeared  by  divine  revelation,  as  it  is 
stated  in  Eccli.  XLVI.,  '  that  he  slept  and  made  known  to  the 
King  the  end  of  his  life.'  Or  the  apparition  was  procured  by 
demons,  if  the  authority  of  Ecclesiasticus  is  not  received,  for  the 
reason  that  it  is  not  among  the  canonical  Scriptures  with  the 
JewsT  This  proposition  is  of  a  man  who  himself  receives  the 
book  but  grants  to  his  opponent  the  right  to  doubt  it.  It  is 
also  of  a  man  little  interested  in  the  question  of  the  canonicity 
of  Scripture. 

In  saying  that  the  book  was  not  received  by  the  Jews,  he 
does  not  establish  that  it  is  not  received  by  the  Christians  ;  in 
fact,  he  seems  to  imply  that  it  was  received  by  them,  but  not  in 
such   manner   as   to   preclude  all   doubt.     The   mind  of   St. 


262        THE  CANON  OF  THE  XHI.  AND   XIV.  CENTURIES. 

Thomas  was  not  much  given  to  these  critical  questions.  He 
used  the  Scriptures  as  the  Church  used  them,  and  this  is  the 
sole  passage  in  all  his  works,  where  he  allows  any  place  for  a 
doubt  concerning  them. 

The  third  objection  is  urged  by  Hody  that  St.  Thomas 
speaks  of  the  Fable  of  Bel  and  the  Dragon,  Dan.  XIII.  But 
all  critics  now  agree  that  this  work  is  supposititious.  The  learn- 
ing of  that  time  consisted  chiefly  in  a  command  of  what  the 
Fathers  had  written,  and  often  we  find  conflictory  statements 
made  by  the  same  writer,  due  to  the  fact  that  he  had  drawn 
from  different  sources,  without  weighing  the  question  in  se. 
So  this  unknown  writer  of  this  supposititious  work  had  proba- 
bly read  Jerome  and  adopted  his  phraseology. 

Among  the  works  of  St.  Thomas,  is  found  a  commentary 
on  the  books  of  Maccabees,  in  the  preface  of  which  it  is  stated, 
"  that  these  books  have  no  authority  with  the  Jews,  as  have 
the  twenty-four  which  compose  the  Canon  according  to  Jerome, 
but  they  have  authority  in  the  Latin  Church,  which  approved 
them  in  a  certain  council,  and  ordered  them  to  be  read."  The 
authenticity  of  this  work  is  rejected  by  many  critics,  and  the 
work  is  believed  to  belong  to  an  English  writer  named  Thomas, 
and  to  date  from  about  the  close  of  the  fourteenth  century, 
but  it  still  remains  a  testimony  of  that  time  to  the  Catholic 
Canon. 

Hugh  of  St.  Caro  (ti26o)  follows  Jerome  on  the  Canon.* 

After  enumerating  the  protocanonical  books  in  verse,  he 
continues  thus  in  Latin  verse  : 

Restant  apocrypha  :    Jesus,  Sapientia,  Pastor, 
Et  Machabaeorum  libri,  Judith  atque  Tobias, 
Hi  quia  sunt  dubii,  sub  canone  non  numerantur  ; 
Sed  quia  vera  canunt,  Ecclesia  suscipit  illos. 

(Postil.  in  Jos.,  Prol.) 

That  he  does  not  reject  these  books  from  the  Scriptures, 
appears  from  his  prologues  in  Judith  and  Ecclesiasticus, 
wherein  he  says  :  "  The  palace  of  the  king  is  made  up  of  four 
things :  the  foundation,  the  walls,  the  roof,  and  the  interior 

*Hugh  was  called  of  St.  Caro,  because  the  place  of  his  birth  was  close  to 
the  church  of  this  name  in  the  environs  of  Vienne  in  Dauphine.  He  entered 
the  Dominican  Order,  was  made  doctor  of  the  Sorbonne,  and  afterwards  Car- 
dinal. He  was  a  man  of  commanding  genius,  both  in  the  speculative  and 
practical  order.  He  was  the  first  to  invent  a  concordance  of  the  Bible.  By 
his  suggestion  the  Dominican  Correctorium  was  started,  and  it  was  finished 
by  his  own  personal  labors.  He  is  also  the  author  of  Commentaries  on  the 
Scriptures, 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  XIII.  AND  XIV.  CENTURIES.        263 

ornaments.  The  foundation  is  the  Law  ;  the  walls  are  the 
Prophets  and  the  Epistles  ;  the  roof  is  the  Gospels,  and  the 
ornaments  are  the  Hagiographa  and  the  Apocrypha." 

Hugh  was  hard  pressed  to  keep  with  the  Church,  and  follow 
in  everything  St.  Jerome.  He  called  the  deuterocanonical 
books  dubii,  not  that  their  message  was  uncertain,  but  because 
their  authors  were  unknown,  and  he  admitted  them  into  the 
deposit  of  Scriptures  because,  as  they  contained  the  inspired 
truth,  the  Church  received  them.  The  most  extreme  of  the 
Jeromists  are  forced  always  to  confess  that  the  Church  received 
these  books,  and  that  is  what  we  are  seeking.  We  wish  to 
know  what  the  Church  held  in  these  ages,  not  what  were  the 
personal  leanings  of  the  theologians.  Hugh  declares  in  his 
preface  to  Ecclesiasticus  that  the  Church  receives  these  books, 
not  to  prove  doctrine,  but  for  moral  instruction,  but  this 
is  a  mere  fiction  borrowed  from  Jerome.  The  Church  received 
them  as  Scripture,  and  "  all  Scripture  is  divinely  inspired." 
Hugh  has  commented  all  the  deuterocanonical  books. 

William  Occam  (ti347)  appeals  to  Jerome  and  Gregory 
the  Great  in  asserting  that  "Judith,  Tobias,  Maccabees,  Eccles- 
iasticus and  Wisdom  are  not  to  be  accepted  to  confirm  that 
which  pertains  to  faith  *  *  The  Church  reads  them,  but  does 
not  receive  them  among  her  Canonical  Scriptures."^ 

When  Occam  testifies  that  the  Church  receives  the  deu- 
terocanonical Scriptures,  he  testifies  to  the  fact  which  we  are 
seeking  to  establish,  and  is  in  line  with  the  whole  course  of 
tradition;  when  he  limits  the  authority  which  the  Church 
accorded  these  books,  he  is  advancing  a  mere  personal  criticism 
on  a  fact  which  the  Church  had  not  decided.  To  be  sure,  the 
Church  up  to  that  time  had  not  canonized  these  books  by 
formal  decree  ;  whereas,  the  first  books  had  been  received  by 
her,  canonized  by  the  approbation  of  the  supreme  authority  of 
the  first  covenant;  so  that  the  denial  of  canonicity  was  not  the 
denial  of  inspiration.  In  saying  that  the  Church  did  not  use 
these  books  to  confirm  faith,  Occam  speaks  against  the  plain 

*Occam  was  a  native  of  Surrey,  in  England.  He  entered  the  Order  of 
Gray  Friars,  and  became  an  ardent  follower  of  Duns  Scotus.  His  unquiet 
spirit  soon  revealed  itself  in  a  radical  departure  from  Scotus,  and  in  his 
advocacy  of  opposite  subtilties.  He  was  so  powerful  in  dialectics  that  men 
called  him  the  doctor  invinciMlis.  In  Occam  we  find  an  extreme  representa- 
tive of  that  scholastic  hair-splitting  of  dialectics  which  did  much  to  make 
men  distrust  and  despise  the  schoolmen.  Occam  sustained  the  part  of  Louis 
of  Bavaria  against  Pope  John  XXII.,  who  excommunicated  him.  He  wa? 
the  author  of  many  other  bizarre  opinions.  He  died  at  Munich  in  1347, 
according  to  general  opinion  absolved  of  ecclesiastical  censures. 


264        THE  CANON  OF  THE  XIII.  AND  XIV.  CENTURIES. 

evidences  of  fact,  for  we  have  seen  that  the  representative  men 
in  the  Church  from  the  beginning,  made  equal  use  of  these 
books  to  teach  doctrine  and  confute  error. 

Nicolas  of  Lyra  (1340)  is  unfavorable  to  the  deuterocan- 
onical  books.* 

According  to  him  the  canonical  books  are  of  such  authority 
that  anything  that  is  contained  in  them  should  be  firmly  and 
without  discussion  held  as  true,  as  also  that  which  follows 
directly  from  them  *  *  but  the  books,  which  according  to 
Jerome,  are  not  of  the  canon  are  received  by  the  Church,  to  be 
read  for  moral  instruction,  although  their  authority  seems  less 
fitted  to  decide  those  questions,  concerning  which  there  might 
be  discussion."  In  his  commentary  on  Ezra  he  says :  "  I 
purpose,  for  the  present,  to  pass  over  the  books  of  Tobias, 
Judith,  and  Maccabees,  although  they  are  historical ;  because 
they  are  not  in  the  Canon  of  the  Jews  or  Christians.  Jerome, 
indeed,  says  they  are  reckoned  among  the  apocrypha."  He 
afterwards  commented  all  the  deuterocanonial  books,  except 
the  fragments  of  Esther,  "  because  they  are  not  in  the  Hebrew 
nor  in  canonical  Scripture,  but  seem  to  be  invented  by  Josephus 
and  other  writers,  and  inserted  in  the  Vulgate,  as  Jerome  says. 
"  In  his  preface  to  Tobias  he  says  :  "Since  by  God's 
assistance,  I  have  written  on  the  canonical  books  of  Holy 
Scripture  *  *  trusting  in  the  same  assistance,  I  purpose 
to  write  upon  the  other  books,  which  are  not  in  the 
canon,  viz.,  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  Judith,  Tobias  and  Mac- 
cabees." In  these  testimonies  we  find  two  elemeuts,  first 
what  the  Church  held,  and  second  what  Nicolas  held.  He 
bears  witness  that  the  Church  receives  the  books,  and  she  in 
her  subsequent  councils  tells  us  in  what  sense  she  received 
them.  Nicolas  certainly  doubted  of  the  divinity  of  the  deutero- 
canonical  books  ;  perhaps  he  fully  judged  that  the  fragments  of 
Esther  were  spurious.  He  was  a  Jew,  and  like  causes  moved 
him  and  Jerome  whom  he  follows.     It  would  be  unreasonable 

♦Nicolas,  called  of  Lyra  from  his  birthplace  in  Normandy,  was  by  birth  a 
Jew.  He  had  studied  under  the  rabbis,  but  became  converted  to  the  faith  of 
Christ,  and  entered  the  order  of  the  Friars  Minor  in  1291.  He  received  the 
degree  of  doctor  at  Paris,  where  he  taught  Scripture  for  many  years  with 
great  success.  He  wrote  commentaries  on  all  the  Scriptures,  except  some  of 
the  deuterocanonical  fragments.  He  was  much  versed  in  Hebrew  and  Chal- 
daic,  which  gave  to  his  commentaries  of  the  Old  Testament  a  solidity  unlike 
that  found  in  the  other  writers  of  his  time.  He  founds  all  on  the  literal 
sense,  and  thus  one  is  not  offended  by  that  excessive  mysticism,  which  has  so 
much  prevailed  in  past  ages.     He  died  in  1340. 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  XV.  CENTURY.         265 

to  say  that  the  mere  doubts  of  one  man  or  of  a  few  men  on  a 
question  not  yet  defined  by  the  Church  should  overthrow  the 
weight  of  tradition. 

On  the  fourth  of  February,  i44i,Pope  Eugene  IV.,  by  and 
with  the  approbation  of  the  Council  of  Florence  promulgated 
the  following  bull  respecting  Holy  Scripture :  "The  holy 
Roman  Church  *  *  *  professes  that  one  only  and  the  same  God 
is  the  author  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  that  is  to  say,  of 
the  Law,  the  Prophets  and  the  Gospels,  because  under  the  in- 
spiration of  the  same  Holy  Ghost,  spoke  the  holy  men  of  both 
Testaments  whose  books  the  Church  receives  and  venerates, 
which  are  contained  under  the  following  titles :  The  five  books 
of  Moses  *  *  *Josue,  Judges,  Ruth,  four  books  of  Kings,  two 
books  of  Chronicles,  Ezra,  Nehemias,  Tobias,  Judith,  Esther, 
Job,  The  Psalms  of  David,  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  Canticle  of 
Canticles,  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah  with 
Baruch,  Ezechiel,  Daniel,  twelve  Prophets,  *  *  *  and  the  two 
Books  of  Maccabees y^ 

*Labbe  Coll,  Concil.  XVIII.  1223.  Concilio  Florentino  perperam  hoc 
decretum  attribui  asserit  HodiiLS  (De  text.  orig.  659  col.  III.)  et  post  eum  Bleek 
(Einl.  Ed.  2.  p.  705)  etc.  Contra  omnes  hos  ilia  transcribere  sufflcit,  quae 
Card,  de  Monte,  primus  Cone.  Trid.  praeses,  ad  similem  objectionem  re- 
pondit :  "Bulla  ilia  Eugenii,  inquarecipiuntur  libri  sacri  et  est  super  unione 
lacobitarum,  et  eius  data  est  Prid.  Non.  Febr.  1441,  vere  edita  est  in  Cone. 
Florentino  ante  eius  dissolutionem.  Falsum  enim  est  et  ab  omni  veritate 
alienum,  quod  concilium  illud  dissolutum  fuerit  an.  1439  statim  post  unionem 
Graecorum  hallucinanturque  maxime,  qui  putant  finem  dicti  concilii  fuissse 
unionem  Graecorum,  quum  longe  post,  per  tres  sc.  fere  annos,  perduraverit, 
usque  videlicet  ad  an.  1442,  quo  anno  6.  Kal.  Mai.  celebrata  10.  sessione,  con- 
cilium ipsum  Romam  translatum  fuerit Praeterea  quod  bulla  unionis 

lacobitarum  data  1441,  in  qua  ipsi  libri  recipiuntur,  edita  fuerit  in  ipso  con- 
cilio, potest  etiam  ex  originali,  manu  propria  ipsius  Eugenii  et  Cardinalium 
ibi  praesentium  subscripta  et  plumbeo  sigillo  obsignata,  quam  ego  ipse  his 
oculis  vidi  Romae  una  cum  aliis  actis  concilii  ab  eisdem  Eugenio  et  Cardina- 
libus  subscriptis  et  plumbeo  sigillo  obsignatis,  quae  nunc   in  arce  molls 

Adriani  inter  alias  scripturas  Sedis  Apostolicae  conservantur Verba  autem  : 

'sacro  approbante  concilio,'  in  principio  bullae  unionis  lacobitarum  non  pon- 
untur,  quia  dictum  principium  totum  pertinet  ad  prooemium  ;  ubi  autem  in- 
cipit  dispositiva,  ponuntur  quidem,  ut  in  aliis  bullis  in  concilio  editis.  Ibi 
enim  sic  habetur  :  'veram  necessariamque  doctrinam  hodie  in  hac  solemni  ses- 
sione, sacro  approbante  Oecumenico  Concilio  Florentino  in  nomine  Domini 
tradimus, etc' "  {Theiner Acta. genuinaSS. oecumen.  Conc.Trident. Zagrabiae 
1874  I.  p.  79,  sq.  Cfr.  etiam  Praenotata  ad  bullum  unionis  in  Labbe  1.  c). 
Quod  si  Bleek  (1.  c.)  post  Keerl  (Die  Apocryphen  des  A.  T.  1852,  p.  150  sq.) 
asserit,  ante  Concilium  Tridentinum  neminem  quidquam  de  decreto  isto  audi- 
visse,  ad  eos  refutandos  sufflciet  testimonium  Caietani  ante  primam  Concilii 
Tridentini  indictionem  demortui,  quod  sic  se  habet :     "  Cum  hac  distinctione 

discernere  poteris  et  dicta  Augustini et  scripta  in  Concilio  Florentino  sub 

Eugenio  IV.  etc."  (Cajetani  Com.  in  Script.,  Lugd.  1639.)  (Comely,  op.  cit.) 


266         THE  CANON  OF  THE  XV.  CENTURY. 

We  see  here  that  the  Church  attributed  no  importance  to 
the  individual  doubts  and  theories  of  the  writers  whom  we 
have  cited  in  opposition  to  the  books  of  the  second  Canon. 
With  no  evidence  of  uncertainty,  she  announces  here  what  she 
had  held  in  practice  from  the  beginning.  The  dogmatic 
import  of  this  decree  is  incontestable,  but  still  it  did  not  abso- 
lutely settle  the  question.  The  Council  promulgated  a  list  of 
inspired  books  which  the  Church  received  as  the  work  of  God, 
but  it  did  not  use  the  word  canonical.  Now  perhaps  none  of 
those  who  had  opposed  the  full  authority  of  the  deutero- 
canonical  books  had  denied  their  inspiration.  No  one  of  them 
had  studied  the  exact  concept  of  inspiration  or  canonicity,  but 
they  had  made  use  of  vague  distinctions  to  restrict  the  dignity 
and  value  of  the  deuterocanonical  books  somewhat  below  that 
of  the  books  of  the  first  Canon.  Moreover,  the  bull  of  Eugene 
IV.  did  not  define  the  Catholic  notion  of  canonicity,  neither 
did  it  define  the  question  of  the  absolute  equality  of  all  the 
books.  It  seems  also  that  the  decrees  of  the  Council  of 
Florence  were  not  diffused  much  through  the  Western  Church 
in  the  first  years  after  its  celebration.  Its  legislation  affected 
more  especially  the  Eastern  world,  and  the  art  of  printing  had 
not  yet  effected  the  general  diffusion  of  knowledge.  Hence 
we  find  writers  after  this  decree  doubting  of  the  divinity  of 
these  books. 

Such  a  one  is  Tostatus,*  Bishop  of  Avila  (ti455). 

Tostatus  gives  evidence  that  he  knew  nothing  of  the  decree 
of  Florence.  He  is  thoroughly  at  sea  in  the  question  of  the 
Canon,  and  from  his  conflicting  statements  it  appears  evident 
that  he  had  not  mastered  the  question,  and  knew  not  clearly 
what  either  himself  or  the  Church  held  on  the  subject.  Com- 
menting the  Prologus  Galeatus  of  Jerome,  he  says  :  "  It  is  said 
that  the  Book  of  Wisdom  is  not  in  the  Canon,  because  the 
Jews  expunged  it  thence ;  in  the  beginning  they  received  it, 
but  after  they  had  laid  hands  on  Jesus  and  slain  him,  remem- 
bering the  evident  testimonies  concerning  him  in  the  same 
book  *  *  taking  counsel,  lest  we  should  impute  to  them  the 
evident  sacrilege,  they  cut  the  book  off  from  the  prophetic 
volumes,  and  interdicted  its  reading.     But  we,  on  the  Church's 

*Tostatu8  was  one  of  the  most  noted  of  the  doctors  of  Salamanca  in 
Spain.  He  filled  with  credit  the  highest  offices  in  Church  and  State.  His 
works  reveal  a  vast  erudition,  but  his  critique  is  often  defective,  and  his 
judgment  does  not  correspond  to  the  vastness  of  his  erudition.  Bellarmine 
styled  him  the  wonder  of  the  world.  He  died  in  1455.  This  is  his  epitaph  : 
"  Hie  stupor  est  mundi,  qui  scibile  discutit  omne." 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  XV.  CENTURY.         267 

authority,  receive  the  book  among  the  authentic  Scriptures,  and 
read  it  at  stated  times  in  the  Church.  Again  the  Book  of  Jesus, 
the  son  of  Sirach,  is  not  in  the  Jewish  Canon  *  *  and  although 
the  Jews  never  received  it  into  the  Canon  of  Scriptures,  the 
Church  receives  it  and  reads  it''  Of  the  Book  of  Judith  he 
speaks  in  a  confused  manner,  and  concludes  :  *'  These  things 
are  true  according  to  the  Jews  ;  but  with  us  it  is  otherwise,  for 
the  Book  of  Judith  is  received  among  the  authentic  Scriptures, 
for  the  reason  that  the  Church  approved  it  in  the  Council  of 
Nice,  and  received  it  into  the  Canon  of  Scriptures  ;  otherwise 
the  Church  would  not  read  it  in  her  divine  liturgy,  as  she  reads 
the  other  authentic  books."  Continuing,  he  asserts  the  very- 
same  of  Tobias  and  Maccabees.  Had  he  remained  consistent 
in  these  views,  no  one  could  have  written  better  on  the  ques- 
tion than  he.  This  was  the  Church's  position  clearly  and 
definitely  enunciated.  But  in  trying  to  reconcile  this  position 
of  the  Church  with  Jerome,  he  becomes  oblivious  of  his  former 
position  and  assails  the  authority  of  the  books  which  he  here 
calls  authentic  Scripture.  Commenting  the  first  preface  of 
Jerome  on  Chronicles,  he  speaks  thus  of  the  deuterocanonical 
books :  "  There  is  a  difference  between  them  (deuterocanonical 
books)  and  the  canonical  books  that  are  called  authentic  (in  his 
former  testimony  he  called  all  the  deuterocanonical  books 
authentic^ ;  from  the  authentic  books  we  may  receive  a  proof 
of  doctrine,  and  validly  argue  against  both  Jew  and  Christian 
to  prove  truth  ;  but  from  the  apocryphal  (deuterocanonical) 
books  we  may  receive  doctrine,  because  they  contain  holy 
doctrine,  wherefore  they  are  called  at  times  hagiographa  ;  but 
their  authority  is  not  sufficient  to  adduce  in  argument  against 
anyone,  nor  to  prove  things  which  are  in  doubt,  and  in  this 
they  are  inferior  to  the  canonical  and  authentic  books  *  *  * 
None  of  these  apocryphal  books,  even  though  it  be  included 
among  the  other  books  of  the  Bible,  and  read  in  the  Church, 
is  of  such  authority  that  the  Church  may  from  it  prove  doc- 
trine, and  in  this  regard  the  Church  does  not  receive  them, 
and  thus  is  to  be  understood  the  declaration  of  Jerome,  that 
the  Church  receives  not  the  apocrypha."  Again,  in  explaining 
the  prologue  on  the  Gospels,  he  states :  "  The  Church  knows 
not  whether  writers  inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost  wrote  these 
(deuterocanonical)  books  *  *  When,  therefore,  there  is  doubt 
concerning  the  writers  of  certain  books,  whether  they  were 
inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  their  authority  is  taken  away,  and 
the  Church  does  not  place  them  in  the  Canon  of  Scriptures. 
Furthermore,  regarding  these  books,  the  Church  is  not  certain 


268         THE  CANON  OF  THE  XV.  CENTURY. 

whether  or  not  heretics  have  not  added  to,  or  taken  from  that 
which  was  written  by  their  proper  authors.  The  Church, 
therefore,  receives  such  books,  permitting  every  one  of  the 
faithful  to  read  them  ;  the  Church  also  reads  them  in  her  offices 
on  account  of  the  many  devout  things  which  are  contained  in 
them;  but  she  obliges  no  one  to  believe  what  is  contained 
therein,  as  is  the  case  with  the  books  of  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasti- 
cus,  Maccabees,  Judith  and  Tobias.  For  though  these  books 
are  received  by  Christians,  and  proof  derived  from  them  in 
some  degree  may  have  weight,  because  the  Church  retains 
those  books,  yet  they  are  not  effectual  to  prove  those  things 
that  are  in  doubt  against  heretics  and  Jews,  as  Jerome  says  in 
his  prologue  upon  Judith." 

We  must  agree  with  Tostatus  that  up  to  the  Florentine 
Council  the  deuterocanonical  books  were  not  of  absolute 
authority  in  doctrine,  because  there  existed  no  definitive 
decree,  and  therefore  one  who  rejected  these  books  could  not 
be  branded  with  heresy.  He  errs  greatly,  however,  in  saying 
that  the  Church  was  ignorant  of  the  inspiration  of  the  books. 
The  contradictions  in  Tostatus  result  from  the  fact  that  he 
tried  to  keep  in  line  with  the  Church  and  St.  Jerome.  In 
saying  that  the  Church  received  these  books  as  authentic 
Scriptures  into  the  Canon  of  Scriptures,  he  is  with  the  Church  ; 
in  doubting  of  the  inspiration  of  the  same  books,  he  is  with 
Jerome  against  the  Church.  We  are  building  our  Canon  on 
what  the  Church  held,  and  to  this  his  testimony  serves. 

The  authority  of  Antoninus,  Archbishop  of  Florence  (f  1459) 
is  sometimes  invoked  against  us.  He  knew  but  vaguely  of  the 
decree  of  Florence.*  According  to  him,  "  the  Church  receives 
these  books  as  true,  and  venerates  them  as  useful,  moral 
treatises,  though,  in  the  discussion  of  those  things  which  are  of 

faith,  not  conclusive  in  argument Wherefore,  perhaps,  they 

have  such  authority  as  have  the  sayings  of  holy  doctors 
approved  by  the  Church."     (Apud  Cornely.) 

The  opinions  of  Antoninus  are  often  strange  and  uncritical. 
His  piety  moved  him  to  an  excessive  veneration  for  the 
opinions  of  St.  Jerome,  in  explaining  the  fact  of  the  Church's 
approval  of  the  deuterocanonical  books.  His  testimony  is  of 
no  avail,  since  against  him    stands  the  authentic   decree   of 

*Chron.  III.  11,  2,  Lugd.  1586.  III.  p.  551):  "  In  aliquibus  vero,  inquibus 
a  fide  vera  discrepabant  (lacobitae  et  Armenii)  prohibentur,  uti  quod  sacra- 
mentum  conflrmationis  non  habebant  in  usu  conferendi  illi  nationi,  declarato 
eis,  quod  illud,  sicut  et  cetera  sacramenta  deberent  accipere,  credere  et  con- 
ferre,  et  aUqua  alia,  quae  nunc  non  occurrunt  menti." 


THE  CANON  OF  THE  XVI.  CENTURY.         269 

Florence,  making  known  to  us,  that  the  Church  received  these 
books  as  divine  Scripture.  St.  Antoninus  quotes  St.  Thomas, 
II.  2.,  as  authority  for  his  strange  opinion,  but  a  close  exam- 
ination fails  to  disclose  any  such  text  in  the  Summa. 

Denis  of  Chartreux  (ti47i)  declares,  that  the  Church 
receives  the  deuterocanonical  books  as  true,  but  not  canonical. 
He  does  not  regard  the  fragments  of  Esther  as  divine  Scrip- 
ture. 

Cardinal  Ximenes  (fisi/),  in  the  preface  to  his  Complu- 
tensian  Polyglott  Bible,  says  :  "  The  books,  indeed,  without 
the  Canon,  which  the  Church  receives  rather  for  the  edification 
of  the  people  than  as  an  authoritative  confirmation  of  the  doc- 
trines of  the  Church,  are  only  found  in  the  Greek." 

We  see  that  the  old  theory  of  Jerome  endured  in  some 
minds,  who,  while  they  received  the  books  with  the  Church,  in 
defect  of  any  absolute  decree  of  the  Church,  inclined  much  to 
the  great  Scriptural  doctor  of  the  Church.  The  decree  of 
Florence,  though  it  defined  the  issue  in  se,  failed  to  establish 
the  absolute  equality  of  the  books,  first,  because  it  was  not 
widely  disseminated  in  those  obscure  times ;  and  secondly,  be- 
cause it  did  not  employ  the  term  canonical. 

Erasmus  (ti536)  finds  "that  it  is  not  unreasonable  to 
establish  different  degrees  of  authority  among  the  Holy  Books, 
as  St.  Augustine  has  done.  The  books  of  the  first  rank  are 
those  concerning  which  there  has  never  existed  a  doubt  with 
the  ancients.     Certainly  Isaiah  has  more  weight  than  Judith."* 

The  great  humanist  evidently  considered  the  books  as 
divine  Scripture,  though  of  less  importance  in  doctrine. 

We  close  the  list  of  the  antetridentine  writers  with  Cajetan 
(f  1524).  At  the  close  of  his  commentary  on  Esther  he  con- 
cludes :  "  The  Church  receives  such  books,  permitting  the 
faithful  to  read  them ;  the  Church  also  reads  them  in  her 
offices,  on  account  of  the  many  devout  things  which  they  con- 
tain. But  the  Church  obliges  no  one  necessarily  to  believe  what 
is  contained  therein,  which  is  the  case  with  the  books  of  Wisdom, 
Ecclesiasticus,  Maccabees,  Judith,  and  Tobit.  For  though 
these  books  are  received  by  Christians,  and  proof  derived  from 
them  may,  in  some  way  or  other,  have  weight,  because  the 
Church  retains  those  books  ;  yet  they  are  not  effectual  for 
proving  those  things  which  are  in  doubt,  against  heretics  or 
Jews.  We  here  terminate  our  commentaries  on  the  historical 
books  of  the  Old  Testament :  for  the  rest  (viz.,  the  books  of 
Judith,  Tobit,  and  the  Maccabees)  are  reckoned  by  Jerome 

*Apud  Malou,  II.  108. 


270        DECREE  OF  THE  COUNCIL  OF  TRENT. 

without  the  canonical  books,  and  are  placed  among  the  apocrypha, 
together  with  Wisdom  and  Ecclesiasticus,  as  appears  in  his 
'  Prologus  Galeatus'  (or  Helmeted  Prologue).  Nor  should  you 
be  disturbed,  O  novice,  if  you  should  anywhere  find  those 
books  reckoned  among  the  canonical  books,  either  in  the  holy 
councils,  or  in  the  holy  doctors.  For  the  words  of  the  coun- 
cils,  as  well  as  of  the  doctors,  are  to  be  submitted  to  the  cor- 
rection of  Jerome ;  and  according  to  his  judgment  [expressed] 
to  the  bishops  Chromatius  and  Heliodorus,  those  books  (and 
if  there  be  any  similar  ones  in  the  Canon  of  the  Bible)  are  NOT 
canonical,  that  is,  they  are  not  those  which  are  given  as  a  rule 
for  the  confirmation  of  the  faith.  They  may,  however,  be 
called  canonical  (that  is,  given  as  a  rule)  for  the  edification  of 
the  faithful ;  since  [they  are]  received  and  authorized  in  the 
Canon  of  the  Bible  for  this  purpose." 

Cajetan  was  not  a  strong  independent  thinker.  He  gave 
himself  up  to  study  in  two  great  departments  of  the  Church's 
science,  dogma  and  Scripture.  In  both,  he  simply  followed 
the  master.  In  dogma  he  followed  St.  Thomas,  absolutely ; 
in  Scripture  he  followed  in  the  same  manner  St.  Jerome. 
Study  for  him  simply  meant  to  find  out  what  these  two  men 
held.  He  paid  slight  heed  to  the  other  theologians  of  his  time. 
Thomas  and  Jerome  for  him  were  supreme.  His  writings  are 
characterized  by  a  certain  self-assurance  and  contempt  for  the 
opinions  of  others,  indicative  of  a  narrow  mind.  The  compass 
of  his  knowledge  had  been  narrowed  by  exclusive  devotion  to 
the  Summa.  Cajetan  is  the  author  of  many  strange  opinions, 
some  of  them  directly  opposed  to  faith.  Certainly  when  he 
says  that  the  decrees  of  general  councils  must  be  submitted  to 
the  correction  of  Jerome,  the  statement  is  false.  It  was  placing 
Jerome  above  the  Church.  And  yet  this  extreme  Jeromist 
had  to  confess  that  the  deuterocanonical  books  were  received 
and  authorized  in  the  Canon  of  the  Bible. 

Chapter  XII. 
Decree  of  the  Council  of  Trent. 

The  necessity  for  the  decree  of  Trent  arose  from  two 
quarters.  Within  the  fold  of  the  Church  there  was  some  un- 
certainty produced  by  the  opinion  of  Cajetan  ;  and  the  sect  of 
protestants  which  arose  at  this  time  rejected  the  deutero- 
canonical books.  To  make  head,  therefore,  against  the  great 
apostasy  and  to  make  known  to  Catholics  the  absolute  position 
of  the  Church,  the  Council  of  Trent,  was  opened  on  the  15th 


DECREE    OF   THE   COUNCIL   OF   TRENT.  271 

of  December,  1545.  The  first  deliberations  of  the  Council  were 
concerned  with  the  question  of  Holy  Scripture.  An  evidence 
of  the  views  of  the  protestants  on  the  Scripture,  may  be  learned 
from  the  following  statement  of  Luther :  "  That  which  does 
not  teach  Christ  is  not  apostolic,  even  if  Peter  or  Paul  said  it ; 
on  the  contrary,  that  which  announces  Christ  is  apostolic,  even 
though  uttered  by  Judas,  Annas,  Herod  or  Pilate." 

In  the  famous  dispute  of  Leipsic  in  15 19,  when  John  Eck 
invoked  the  authority  of  Maccabees  to  defend  the  doctrine  of 
Purgatory,  Luther  made  answer:  **  There  is  no  proof  of  Pur- 
gatory in  any  portion  of  sacred  Scripture,  which  can  enter  into 
the  argument,  and  serve  as  a  proof ;  for  the  book  of  Maccabees 
not  being  in  the  Canon,  is  of  weight  with  the  faithful,  but 
avails  nothing  with  the  obstinate."  In  the  spread  of  these  ex- 
treme ideas,  men  looked  to  the  Church  for  a  definition,  and 
she  responded  to  the  need. 

A  Council  held  at  Sens,  in  1528  declared,  that  he  who  held 
not  the  tradition  of  the  Church,  and  rejected  the  decrees  of 
the  Third  Council  of  Carthage,  and  those  of  Popes  Innocent 
and  Gelasius,  should  be  condemned  as  a  schismatic,  and  inven- 
tors of  all  heresies;  but  this  body  was  only  local,  and  could  not 
command  all  men's  faith  ;  wherefore  a  decree  from  the  supreme 
authority  in  the  Church  was  necessary.  On  the  nth  of 
February,  1546,  the  members  of  the  Council,  who  had  been 
divided  into  three  particular  congregations,  assembled.  The 
subject  of  deliberation  respecting  the  Canon  was  : 

I. — Whether  the  Council  should  receive  the  books  of  Scrip- 
ture simply,  or  after  a  previous  examination  by  the  theolo- 
gians. 

2. — Whether  two  classes  of  books  should  be  constituted,  so 
that  some  should  be  declared  authoritative  to  prove  doctrine  ; 
others  useful  for  instruction.     (Acta  Genuina,  Theiner.) 

Cardinal  Cervini,  president  of  the  Council,  afterwards  Pope 
Marcellus  II.,  proposed  the  questions  in  all  their  bearings  to 
the  Fathers.*  Certain  Fathers  were  of  the  mind  that  it  would 
be  well  to  examine,  at  least  summarily,  the  objections  of  the 

*Duo  ego  subiiciam,  quae  in  mea  particulari  congregatione  tractata  fue- 
ruiit ;  unum  est,  utrum  simpliciter  facienda  sit  approbatio  Scripturae,  prout 
factum  fuit  per  Cone.  Florent.  et  iuxta  etiam  antiquiora  concilia,  an  potius 
distinguendum;  qui  sint  libri  sacri,  ex  quibus  f  undamenta  nostrae  fidei  et  doc- 
trinae  eruantur,  et  qui  sint  quidem  canonici,  sed  non  eiusdem  auctoritatis,  ut 
priores  illi,  sed  ideo  ab  Ecclesia  recepti,  ut  ex  his  multitudo  instrui  possit, 
quales  sunt  libri  Sapientiae,  Promrbtorum  et  alii  similes  ;  idque  forsan  non  abs 
re  esset,  quoniam  videtur  ambiguum  necdum  ab  Ecclesia  determinatum, 
quamvis  et  Augustinus  et  Hieronymus  et  alii  veteres  de  iis  nonnulla  tradide- 


272        DECREE  OF  THE  COUNCIL  OF  TRENT. 

adversaries  against  the  deuterocanonical  books,  but  the  majority 
decided  "  to  receive  the  books  simply  and  entirely  as  the 
Church  had  done  in  other  councils,  and  especially  in  the 
Council  of  Florence."     (Theiner  1.  c.) 

We  see  here  that  there  was  no  new  legislation  in  this  regard 
in  the  Council  of  Trent.  The  Council  simply  reiterated  and 
confirmed  what  had  been  believed  and  promulgated  in  the 
Church  from  the  earliest  times. 

The  question  was  then  submitted  by  the  general  of  the 
Augustinians,  and  Seripando,  legate  of  Paul  IV.,  •'  that  a  dis- 
tinction should  be  made  between  those  books  which  are 
authentic  and  canonical,  and  upon  which  our  faith  rests,  and 
those  which  are  merely  canonical,  and  useful  to  be  read  for 
instruction  in  the  Church,  as  St.  Jerome  places  in  the  Prologus 
Galeatus."  (Theiner  1.  c.)  This  proposition  found  no  favor 
and  was  straightway  abandoned. 

In  the  Council  of  Trent,  we  find  often  a  lack  of  precision  in 
the  views  of  individual  members ;  but  the  conclusions  arrived 
at  are  always  clear  and  profound. 

So  here,  it  is  not  evident  just  what  distinction  this  man 
wished  to  induce.  But  in  every  case,  his  proposition  was  use- 
less. If  he  wished  merely  to  say  that  the  import  of  some 
divine  books  is  more  important  in  Christian  doctrine  than 
others,  the  truth  is  understood  by  all  Christians,  and  needs  no 
definition.  The  Council  was  not  about  to  define  that  Mac- 
cabees was  as  valuable  to  use  as  Matthew.  But  if  he  wished 
to  say  that  the  relation  which  God  bore  to  any  book  was  less 
than  inspiration  as  we  have  defined  it,  the  proposition  is  false. 
The  Council  simply  extended  proper  inspiration  to  all  the 
books,  and  left  the  question  of  their  respective  dogmatic  and 
moral  values  intact. 

On  the  1 2th  of  February,  1546,  Cardinal  Cervini  moved  on 
the  part  of  his  particular  congregation  that  the  Council  set 
forth  in  brief  the  motives  why  it  receives  the  books  contested 
by  the  protestants;  but  it  was  decided  by  common  accord 
"  that  the  Holy  Books  should  be  simply  approved  according 
to  the  decree  of  the  Council  of  Florence."     (Theiner,  I.  52.) 

rint.  Alterum  est,  utrum  sicco  pede  approbatio  ista  facienda  sit,  an  vero 
additis  rationibus  et  solutis  argumentis,  quibus  adversarii  maxime  innituntur 
ad  eorum  nonnuUos  impugnandos  et  confringendos.  Ab  ipsis  enim,  ut  omnes 
vos  scitis,  infringitur  imprimis  liber  Machdbaeorum,  quem  penitus  reilciunt, 
item  Epistola  Pauli  ad  Hebr. ,  una  lacobi  et  altera  Petri  ac  etiam  Apocalypsis 
et  alia  pleraque."  Acta  genuina  p.  52. — Quod  Proverbiorum  liber  cum 
Sapientia  coniungatur,  lapsum  calami  diceres,  nisi  etiam  Pallavicini 
(1.  c.  I.  p.  220)  haberet :  "  Proverbiorum  et  Sapientlae  libri."  (Comely,  op.  cit.) 


DECREE   OF  THE   COUNCIL   OF  TRENT.  273 

The  next  question  was  whether  the  books  of  both  classes 
should  be  received  with  the  same  reverence,  (pari  pietatis 
affectu).  This  was  for  a  long  time  discussed,  the  majority  being 
in  favor  of  the  affirmative,  but  no  conclusion  was  then  reached. 
The  following  meetings,  both  particular  and  general,  were 
given  up  to  various  questions  regarding  Scripture  and  tra- 
dition. On  the  22d  of  March  the  secretary  of  the  Council, 
Angelo  Massarelli,  proposed  to  reject  the  decree  of  the  Council 
of  Florence  as  of  doubtful  authenticity,  but  he  was  refuted  by 
the  president  of  the  Council.  Cardinal  Del  Monte,  legate  of 
the  Pope,  had,  on  the  26th  of  February,  refuted  the  same 
objection. 

A  detailed  list  of  fourteen  propositions  was  at  this  juncture 
drawn  up  to  be  examined  and  voted  on  in  detail.  Not  all 
these  regard  our  question.  The  tenth  contains  the  pith  of  our 
present  theme.  This  was  whether  the  deuterocanonical  books 
should  be  approved  as  sacred  and  canonical.  This  was  resolved 
in  the  affirmative  by  forty-four  votes,  against  three  negative 
votes  and  five  doubtful  ones.     (Theiner,  I.  'j']^ 

The  thirteenth  proposition  submitted  the  question,  whether 
to  make  a  distinction  between  the  two  classes  of  books,  or 
enumerate  them  according  to  the  Council  of  Florence.  It  was 
decided  to  receive  the  deuterocanonical  books  without  exam- 
ination or  discussion  by  forty-one  votes,  against  four  in  opposi- 
tion and  eight  doubtful  ones.  The  Council  also  unanimously 
decided  that  the  things  carried  by  a  majority  vote  should  not 
be  subject  to  further  discussion. 

On  the  fifth  of  April,  the  corrected  Schema  was  placed 
before  the  Fathers.  The  Cardinal  of  Trent  moved  that  the 
deuterocanonical  books  be  placed  after  the  protocanonical 
ones,  "  because  Tobias,  which  Jerome  held  to  be  apocryphal, 
is  placed  in  the  decree  ahead  of  other  books  whose  authority 
no  one  has  ever  questioned."  The  motion  was  lost,  since  it 
was  against  the  former  vote  that  they  should  approve  the 
decree  of  the  Council  of  Florence. 

The  Bishop  of  Castellamare  remarked  that  the  words 
sacred  and  canonical  were  objectionable  on  account  of  Judith, 
and  some  others  which  are  not  in  the  Hebrew  Canon.  He 
moved  to  substitute:  "in  the  Canon  of  the  Church."  Car- 
dinal Cervini,  the  president,  responded:  "  It  is  true  what  thou 
sayest,  but  we  follow  the  Canon  of  the  Church,  not  of  the 
Jews.  When  we  say  Canonical,  therefore,  we  understand  of 
the  Canon  of  the  Church."  And  the  Bishop  of  Castella- 
mare  responded  :  "  Placet." 

R 


274  DECREE   OF   THE   COUNCIL   OF  TRENT. 

On  the  8th  of  April,  1546,  two  months  after  the  question 
of  the  Scriptures  had  been  submitted  to  the  Council,  after 
mature  deliberation  and  discussion,  the  Council  promulgated 
its   famous   decree : 

"  The  thrice  holy,  oecumenical,  general  Council  of  Trent 
*  *  *  following  the  examples  of  the  orthodox  Fathers,  receives 
and  venerates  with  equal  piety  and  respect  all  the  books  of  the 
Old  and  New  Testament,  because  one  and  the  same  God  is  the 
author  of  both.  *  *  *  The  Council  judges  good  to  join  to  this 
decree  a  list  of  books,  so  that  no  one  may  doubt  concerning  the 
books  received  by  the  same  Synod.  These  are  the  books :  Of 
the  Old  Testament,  the  five  books  of  Moses,  that  is  to  say : 
Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus,  Numbers,  Deuteronomy;  Joshua, 
Judges,  Ruth,  four  books  of  Kings,  two  of  Chronicles,  the 
first  of  Ezra;  and  second  which  is  called  Nehemiah,  Tobias, 
ludith,  Esther,  Job,  the  Davidic  Psalter  of  one  hundred  and 
fifty  Psalms,  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  Canticles  of  Canticles, 
Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah  with  Baruch,  Eze. 
chiel,  Daniel,  the  twelve  minor  Prophets,  viz.,  Hosea,  Joel, 
Amos,  Abdias,  Jonas,  Micha,  Nahum,  Habacuc,  Sophonias, 
Haggai,  Zachary,  Malachi,  the  two  books  of  Maccabees,  first 
and  second.  *  *  *  If  anyone  shall  not  receive  these  same  books 
as  sacred  and  Canonical  with  all  their  parts,  as  they  are  read  in 
the  Catholic  Church,  and  contained  in  the  Latin  Vulgate ; 
and  shall  knowingly  and  wilfully  reject  the  aforesaid  traditions, 
let  him  be  anathema."  * 

The  clause,  with  all  their  parts,  was  inserted  primarily  to 
include  certain  passages  of  the  Gospels,  concerning  which  doubt 
had  existed.  In  the  general  congregation  on  the  27th  of  March, 
1546,  Cardinal  Pacheco  asked  that  these  portions  of  the  New 
Testament  should  be  specially  mentioned.  The  words  of  the 
decree  are  of  such  comprehension,  that  they  include  all  parts, 
annulling  all  doubts  that  had  existed  both  concerning  the  Old 
and  the  New  Testaments. 

In  virtue  of  this  decree,  every  Catholic  must  accept  as 
divinely  inspired,  the  deuterocanonical  books  and  fragments,  as 
they  are  read  in  the  Latin  Vulgate.  The  Council  did  not  treat 
this  as  an  open  question,  but  added  corroboration  and  precision 
to  preceding  documents.  The  history  of  the  Council  by 
Pallavicini  might  induce  one  into  error.  He  states  that  the 
question  was  submitted,  whether  all  the  books  of  both  Tes- 
taments should   be   approved.     This   would   imply   that   the 

•Cone.  Trid.  Sess.  IV.  De  Can.  Script. 


DECREE  OF  THE  COUNCIL  OF  TRENT.  275 

Council  felt  itself  not  bound  by  the  Council  of  Florence.  The 
authentic  acts  by  Theiner  give  an  entirely  different  sense  to 
the  deliberation.  The  proposal  was  couched  in  these  terms : 
That  in  the  proximate  session,  the  books  of  Holy  Scripture 
should  be  received,  and  the  way  and  manner  determined,  in 
in  which  they  should  be  received.  To  be  sure,  the  discussion 
of  the  project  revealed  much  lack  of  clearness  in  the  ideas  of 
certain  Fathers,  but  the  great  body  of  the  Council  always 
treated  the  question  as  decided  by  the  existing  documents  of 
the  Church.  The  Council  of  Trent  admitted  no  different 
degrees  of  inspiration  in  the  Holy  Books,  because  inspiration 
has  no  degrees.  A  book  is  either  the  product  of  God's  author- 
ship, or  it  is  not.  The  Council  accepted  the  deuterocanonical 
books  as  having  God  for  their  author.  The  old  distinction  of 
greater  and  less  degrees  of  inspiration  had  some  ardent  sup- 
porters in  the  Council.  The  ground  of  their  opinion  seems  to 
have  been  an  imperfect  understanding  of  the  nature  of  inspira- 
tion. The  vast  majority  of  the  Council  announced  to  them : 
"All  the  books  of  our  Bible,  whatever  be  their  contents,  and 
the  profit  one  may  draw  from  them,  have  been  regarded  as  in- 
spired by  Christian  tradition,  and  for  us,  they  are  canonical." 
The  opponents  finished  by  adding  their  placet.  The  absolute 
equality  of  all  the  books  in  their  inspiration  is  assured  by  the 
Council ;  for  if  a  book  be  sacred  and  canonical^  and  have  God 
for  its  author,  it  cannot  be  inferior  to  the  others  of  which  the 
same  is  asserted.  Some  theologians  still  confuse  the  issue 
by  declaring  that  the  question  of  equality  was  not  explicitly 
defined  on  account  of  its  difficulty ;  and  the  question  was  left  as 
the  Holy  Fathers  had  left  it.  (Loisy,  1.  c).  This  is  nothing. 
The  Council  did  not  deem  it  necessary  to  promulgate  an  ex- 
plicit decree,  making  the  book  equal  in  inspiration,  because  such 
was  equivalently  contained  in  the  main  decree ;  the  Council  did 
not  declare  the  books  equal  in  value,  because  they  are  not  thus 
equal,  God  spoke  in  divers  manners  in  the  Scriptures,  and  some 
truths  therein  contained  are  more  valuable  than  others,  though 
these  latter  are  no  less  the  inspired  writing  of  God. 

The  decree  of  Trent  was  definite,  final  and  clear  but  yet  it 
took  some  time  for  it  to  take  absolute  hold  upon  all  the  rep. 
resentatives  of  Catholic  thought.  If  men's  minds  were  always 
clear  and  virtuous,  there  would  be  far  less  confusion  in  the 
world.  But  often  from  lack  of  intellectual  penetration,  or  from 
excessive  addiction  to  some  theory,  men  of  note  give  utter- 
ance to  false  opinions.  Especially  is  this  true  in  the  harmon- 
izing of  schools  of  theology,  with  some  definitive  sentence  of 


376        DECREE  OF  THE  COUNCIL  OF  TRENT. 

the  Church.  Those  who  have  assimilated  some  theory  in  con- 
flict with  the  new  decree,  will  retreat  from  their  position  slowly, 
and  will  endeavor,  by  restricting  the  degree,  to  cling  to  as  much 
as  possible  of  the  old  opinion.  Thus  Cajetan  tried  to  con. 
form  the  decree  of  Florence  to  his  own  opinion.  With  time 
these  struggles  and  gasps  of  dying  error  cease,  and  the  author- 
ity of  the  rock-built  Church  remains  the  absolute  guide  of  the 
faithful  of  Christ. 

Thus,  for  a  few  years  after  the  Council  of  Trent,  there 
was  some  slight  friction  between  its  decree  and  certain  theo- 
logians. This  was  augmented  by  the  fact  that  the  precise 
concepts  of  inspiration  and  canonicity  were  not  then  well 
understood.  The  Council  gave  us  the  text,  and  as  men 
examined  the  precise  significance  of  its  words,  this  loose- 
ness of  opinion  vanished  from  Catholic  schools  of  theology, 
so  that  every  Catholic  holds  to-day  that  the  deuterocan- 
onical  books  are  as  much  inspired  and  as  canonical  as  the 
Pentateuch  or  the  Gospels. 

An  intentional  falsehood  is  contained  in  Home's  Introduc- 
tion, Vol.  II.  p.  489*,  where  he  places  Bellarmine  (ti62i) 
against  the  deuterocanonical  books,  by  taking  certain  passages 
out  of  their  proper  context  in  the  works  of  the  great  controver- 
sialist. Bellarmine  in  his  works  clearly  declares :  "  That  the 
deuterocanonical  works  are  not  only  good  and  holy,  but  they 
are  sacred  and  of  infallible  truth.  The  Church  has  never 
doubted  of  their  canonicity  in  the  sense  that  she  lacked  testi- 
monies to  attest  the  divinity  of  their  origin,  but  simply  certain 
persons  doubted,  and  the  Church  did  not  wish  to  define  the 
question  at  that  time."* 

From  this  it  appears  that  Bellarmine's  opinion  was,  that  the 
deuterocanonical  books  always  had  the  right  to  canonicity ; 
they  came  into  actual  enjoyment  of  this  right  by  the  timely 
decree  of  Trent. 

The  aforesaid  Home  also  falsely  adduces  the  testimony  of 

SiXTUS  OF  SlENNA.f 

*De  Verbo  Dei.  I.  1,  Cap.  IV. 

f Sixtus  was  by  birth  a  Jew.  He  became  converted  to  Christianity,  and 
entered  the  Franciscan  order.  He  was  afterwards  convicted  of  having  taught 
heresies;  and  as  he  obstinately  refused  to  abjure  them,  he  was  condemned  to 
be  burned  at  the  stake.  Just  as  the  sentence  was  to  be  executed,  Cardinal 
Ghisleri,  the  Inquisitor-general,  afterwards  Pope  Pius  V.,  overcame  his 
obstinacy,  and  transferred  him  from  the  Franciscans  to  the  Dominican  order. 
He  consecrated  his  life  to  the  study  of  the  Scriptures,  and  died  at  Grenoa,  in 
1569.  His  greatest  work  is  his  Bibliotheca  Sancta.  Many  of  his  opinions 
are  excellent,  but,  at  times,  his  critique  is  defective. 


DECREE  OF  THE  COUNCIL  OF  TRENT.  277 

In  his  Bibliotheca  Sancta  (Tom.  i.  pag.  i8),  Sixtus  distin- 
guishes two  classes  of  books.  There  he  invented  the  terms 
protocanonical  and  deuterocanonical,  and  speaks  of  them  thus: 
"  The  first  class  is  formed  of  those  books,  which  may  be  called 
protocanonical,  regarding  which  there  has  never  been  doubt 
or  controversy  in  the  Catholic  Church.  The  second  class  com- 
prises the  books  which  were  formerly  known  as  ecclesiastical, 
but  which  are  now  by  us  called  deuterocanonical.  These  latter 
were  not  recognized  by  all  since  the  times  of  the  Apostles,  but 
long  afterward,  and  for  this  reason  Catholic  opinion  concern- 
ing them  was,  at  first,  uncertain.  The  early  Fathers  regarded 
them  as  apocryphal  and  non-canonical,  and  only  permitted 
them  to  be  read  to  the  catechumens ;  then  with  time  they  per- 
mitted them  to  be  read  to  the  faithful,  not  for  proof  of  doc- 
trine, but  for  edification  of  the  faithful ;  and  since  these  books 
were  read  publicly  in  the  Church,  they  were  called  ecclesias- 
tical. Finally,  they  have  been  placed  among  the  Scriptures 
of  irrefragable  authority T 

Sixtus  exaggerates  the  doubts  that  existed  concerning  the 
books.  He  was  probably  more  conversant  with  Jerome  than 
with  the  other  Fathers,  and  takes  him  as  a  representative  of  the 
opinions  of  his  time.  Against  his  testimony  stands  the  united 
testimony  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  composed  of  the  greatest 
body  of  theologians  ever  assembled,  declaring  that  the  Church, 
relying  on  tradition,  receives  these  books  as  sacred  and  canonical. 
The  Council  promulgated  officially  what  had  been  always  im- 
plicitly held.  But  Sixtus  is  disposed  to  accord  these  books  a 
place  among  the  canonical  Scriptures  on  the  authority  of  the 
Church.  He  accepts  the  decree,  as  he  understands  it.  But 
the  opinions  of  St.  Jerome  moved  him  still  to  reject  the 
deuterocanonical  fragments  of  Esther.  Thus,  in  the  aforesaid 
reference,  he  discourses  of  it :  "  The  appendix  of  the  Book  of 
Esther,  which  comprises  the  seven  last  chapters,  consists  of 
various  rags  and  patchwork,  of  which  we  find  nothing  in  the 
Hebrew  exemplars.  *  ■*  *  But  it  occurs  to  me  here  to  admonish 
and  entreat  the  good  reader  not  to  accuse  me  of  temerity,  that 
I  cut  out  these  seven  chapters  from  the  canonical  Scriptures 
and  place  them  among  the  apocrypha,  as  though  I  were  un- 
mindful of  the  decree  of  Trent,  which,  under  pain  of  anathema, 
commands  that  all  the  hooks  entire  should  be  received,  as  they 
are  read  in  the  Church,  and  as  they  exist  in  the  old  Latin 
Vulgate  edition. 

But  that  Canon  is  to  be  understood,  of  true  and  genuine 
parts  of  Scripture,  pertaining  to  the  integrity  of  the  books, 


278        DECREE  OF  THE  COUNCIL  OF  TRENT. 

and  not  of  certain  ragged  appendages,  and  patches  rashly  and 
disorderly  tacked  on  by  some  unknown  author,  such  as  are 
these  last  chapters,  which  not  only  Cardinal  Hugh,  Nicolas  of 
Lyra,  and  Denis  the  Carthusian  deny  to  be  canonical ;  but  also 
St.  Jerome  cuts  off  from  the  volume  of  Esther  as  a  spurious 
part,  to  use  his  own  words,  '  made  up  of  ragged  fragments  of 
words,  which  could  be  said  and  heard  in  the  (several)  occasions, 
just  as  it  is  customary  for  scholars  to  take  a  theme,  and  excogi- 
tate what  words  one  would  use,  who  received  or  wrought  an 
injury.  Origen,  also,  in  his  letter  to  Julius  Africanus,  rejects 
these  appendages.' " 

Sixtus  knew  more  of  the  opinions  of  Jerome,  than  of  the 
value  of  oecumenical  decrees.  No  part  of  the  deuterocanoni- 
cal  books  is  treated  so  severely  by  Jerome,  as  the  fragments  of 
Esther.  As  it  was  hopeless  to  make  Jerome  agree  on  this 
point  with  the  Council,  as  generally  understood,  this  avowed 
disciple  of  Jerome  sought  by  his  strange  distinction  to  main 
tain  the  old  opinion  of  his  master.  But  anyone  can  see  the 
flimsiness  of  the  attempt.  In  fact,  in  the  subsequent  centuries, 
there  is  not  found  one  to  endorse  such  opinion.  The  words  of 
the  Council  were  too  explicit.  Every  part  that  was  in  the 
Vulgate  and  read  in  the  Church  was  declared  sacred  and 
canonical ;  the  fragments  of  Esther  fulfill  both  these  condi- 
tions. The  only  way  to  reject  deuterocanonical  books  and 
fragments  is  to  reject  the  Council  of  Trent.  In  fact  it  is  a 
remarkable  fact,  that,  in  the  ages  following  the  Council,  Sixtus' 
is  the  only  voice  raised  in  opposition  to  the  equal  canonicity 
of  the  books,  and  he  only  aims  at  these  fragments.  It  is  an 
evidence  of  the  universal  obedience  of  faith  among  the  children 
of  the  Church,  to  the  voice  of  authority. 

Among  the  authors  of  the  seventeenth  century  Bossuet  has 
expressed  the  position  of  the  Church  with  the  most  force  and 
precision.  In  a  letter  to  Leibnitz  in  1700,  he  resumes  as  fol- 
lows: 

"  Nous  dirons  done,  s'il  vous  plait,  tous  deux  ensemble, 
qu'une  nouvelle  reconnaissance  de  quelque  livre  canonique 
dont  quelques-uns  auraient  dout6  ne  d^roge  point  a  la  per- 
p^tuit^  de  la  tradition, . .  Pour  etre  constante  et  perp^tuelle,  la 
v^rite  catholique  ne  laisse  pas  d'avoir  ses  progr^s :  elle  est  con- 
nue  en  un  lieu  plus  qu'en  un  autre,  en  un  temps  plus  qu'en  un 
autre,  plus  clairement,  plus  distinctement,  plus  universelle- 
ment.  II  sufifit,  pour  ^tablir  la  succession  et  la  perp^tuit^  de 
la  foi  d'un  livre  saint,  comme  de  toute  autre  v6rit6,  qu'elle  soit 
toujours  reconnue ;  qu'elle  le  soit  dans  les  plus  grand  nombre 


DECREE   OF  THE   COUNCIL  OF  TRENT.  279 

sans  comparaison ;  qu'elle  le  soit  dans  les  EgHses  les  plus  6mi- 
nentes,  les  plus  anciennes  et  les  plus  r^v^r^es ;  qu'elle  s'y 
soutienne,  qu'elle  gagne  et  qu'elle  se  r^pande  d'elle-meme, 
jusqu'k  tant  que  le  Saint-Esprit,  la  force  de  la  tradition  et  le 
gout,  non  celui  des  particuliers,  mais  I'universal  de  I'Eglise,  la 
fasse  enfin  pr^valoir  comme  elle  a  fait  au  concile  de  Trente." 

He  insists  on  the  practical  usage  of  the  Church  in  reading 
the  books,  and  on  the  constant  quotations  of  the  Fathers ; 

"  Ajoutons**  *  que  le  terme  de  canonique  n'ayantpas  tou- 
jours  une  signification  uniforme,  nier  qu'un  livre  soit  canonique 
en  un  sens,  ce  n'est  pas  nier  qu'il  ne  le  soit  en  un  autre ;  nier 
qu'il  soit,  ce  qui  est  tr^s  vrai,  dans  le  canon  des  H^breux,  ou 
regu  sans  contradiction  parmi  les  chr^tiens,  n'empeche  pas 
qu'il  ne  soit  au  fond  dans  le  canon  de  I'Eglise,  par  I'autorit^  que 
lui  donne  la  lecture  presque  g^n^rale  et  par  I'usage  qu'on  en 
faisait  par  tout  I'univers.  C'est  ainsi  qu'il  faut  concilier  plutdt 
que  commettre  ensemble  les  Eglises  et  les  auteurs  eccl^sias- 
tiques,  par  des  principes  communs  k  tous  les  divers  sentiments 
et  par  le  retranchement  de  toute  ambiguity." 

The  abb^  Dupin,  a  contemporary  of  Bossuet,  had  at  first 
held  loose  opinions  concerning  the  deuterocanonical  books, 
but  under  the  influence  of  Bossuet,  he  modified  his  position 
to  the  following  clear  and  just  statement : 

"  Toutes  ces  raisons  et  ces  considerations  jointes  ensemble 
sont  suffisantes  pour  6tablir  Tautorit^  de  ces  livres,  dont  la 
definition  du  concile  de  Trente  ne  laisse  aucun  lieu  de  douter. 
Car,  quoiqu'il  ne  se  fasse  point  de  nouvelle  r6v61ation  k  I'Eglise, 
elle  peut  apres  bien  du  temps  etre  plus  assur^e  de  la  v^rite 
d'un  ouvrage  qu'elle  ne  I'^tait  auparavant,  quand,  apr^s  I'avoir 
bien  examine,  elle  a  trouv6  un  legitime  fondement  de  n'en  plus 
douter  et  une  tradition  sufifisante  dans  quelques  Eglises  pour 
le  juger  authentique.  C'est  la  raison  pour  laquelle  saint 
Jerome  dit  que  la  seconde  epitre  de  saint  Pierre  avait  acquis 
de  I'autorite  par  I'antiquit^  et  par  I'usage,  et  m^ritait  d'etre 
mise    au    rang    des    livres   sacr^s    du    Noveau    Testament.* 

Bernard  Lamy  (fi/is)  of  the  congregation  of  the  oratory, 
has  a  singular  opinion  concerning  the  deuterocanonical  books. 
In  his  Apparatus  Biblicus,  after  setting  forth  the  opinions  of 
Rufinus  and  Jerome,  he  concludes:  "Therefore,  the  books 
which  are  in  the  second  Canon,  though  joined  to  those  of  the 
first  Canon,  are  not  of  the  same  authority''  He  evidently 
accords  to  these  books  canonicity,  but  believes  that  the  degree 

♦Dissert,  prelim,  ou  Proleg.  sur  la  Bible,  1.  53-53. 


280  DECREE  OF  THE  COUNCIL  OF  TRENT. 

of  inspiration  is  not  so  intense  in  them.  Loisy  (Histoire  du 
Canon  de  I'Ancien  Testament,  pag.  235)  favors  this  opinion, 
and  cites  Ubaldi  in  support  of  it.*  But  is  plainly  evident  that 
Ubaldi  there  means  to  distinguish  between  revelation,  desig- 
nated by  him  as  the  more  intense  mode  of  inspiration ;  and 
inspiration  proper,  which  permitted  the  acquisition  of  know- 
ledge by  natural  means.  There  is  nothing  in  Ubaldi  in  support 
of  this  vainly  imagined  distinction  of  degrees  of  canonicity. 

A  greater  departure  from  the  decree  of  the  Council  of 
Trent  was  made  by  Jahn  (fi8i6)  who  declares:  "That  by 
the  testimony  of  the  Fathers  of  Trent,  the  difference  between 
protocanonical  and  deuterocanonical  books  has  by  no  means 
been  removed,  and  the  Fathers  well  understood  that  it  could 
not  be  removed,  no  more  than  the  fact  upon  which  it  stood, 
namely :  that  the  deuterocanonical  books,  had  not  been  re- 
ceived everywhere,  and  by  all  in  past  times."  ©nteitung  in  bit 
©ottUc^en  ISiic^er  be6  Sllten  ©uitbeS.    (2  edit.)  I.  140. 

There  is  evidence  of  exceeding  shortsightedness  here.  The 
Fathers  did  not  change  the  external  facts  concerning  the 
Scriptures.  They  could  not  change  the  past.  They  did  not 
reverse  the  opinion  of  Jerome  ;  they  did  not  declare  that  the 
deuterocanonical  books  had  never  been  doubted,  neither  did 
they  declare  that  the  doctrinal  import  of  these  books  were 
equal  to  that  of  the  first  Canon.     But  they  did  declare  that 

*"  Venim  in  specie  et  in  concrete  nihil  vetat  quominus  in  quibusdam  locis 
intensiorem  veluti  gradum  inspirationis  admittamus,  atque  ita  diversos  modus 
inspirationis  distinguamus.  Imo  hoc  omnino  faciendum  videtur :  siquidem 
diversa  rerum  natura,  et  diversa  Scriptoris  conditio  hoc  requirere  videtur. 
Itaque,  ud  aliquid  magis  in  specie  dicamus,  distinguere  possumus  loca  Scrip- 
turae  propTietica,  moralia  et  historica,  et  in  his  rursus  substantiam  historiae  a 
minutis  quibusdam  adiunctis.  Ad  loca  prophetica  quod  attinet,  duo  casus 
distinguendi  sunt :  vel  enim  vaticinium  a  propheta  antea  editum  fuit,  et 
postea  scripto  consignatum,  ut  sunt  pleraque  vaticinia  S.  Scripturae,  vel  in 
ipso  scribendi  actu  vaticinium  editum  est :  in  primo  casu  sufficit  communis 
et  ordinaria  inspiratio  ut  Scriptura  prophetica  etiam  formaliter,  seu  quatenus 
scripta  est,  divina  et  inspirata  dici  possit ;  in  altero  vero  casu  non  solum  in- 
spiratio. sed  vere  ac  proprie  dicta  revelatio  necessaria  fuit,  cum  futurorum 
cognitio  nonnisi  ex  divina  revelations  haberi  possit.  Talia  sunt  quaedam 
leremiae  vaticinia,  ut  colligi  videtur  ex  Jer.  XXXVI,  17,  18,  ubi  leremias 
dicitur  dictasse  Baruch  tamquam  amanuensi  suas  prophetias.  Quod  pertinet 
ad  partes  didacticas  et  historicas,  generatim  loquendo  non  amplius  quam 
communis  inspirationis  ratio  requirebatur  :  siquidem  tum  moralis  doctrina, 
tum  historia  Agiographis  nota  erat  sive  ex  naturali  lumine  cum  revelatione 
coniuncto,  ut  in  Libris  Sapientialibus,  sive  ex  audita  praedicatione,  ut  in 
Evangeliis  et  Epistolis  Apostolorum,  sive  ex  scriptis  documentis,  vel  etiam 
ex  propria  experientia,  ut  generatim  fiebat  in  scriptoribus  sacrae  historiae 
utriusque  Testamenti."    Ubaldi  II.  111. 


DECREE   OF  THE   COUNCIL   OF   TRENT.  281 

they  were  all  sacred  and  canonical  having  God  for  their  author. 
By  this  definition  they  added  nothing  intrinsically  to  the  books  ; 
but  they  infallibly  declared  that,  in  virtue  of  their  inspired 
character,  they  always  had  a  right  to  canonicity,  which  they 
now  officially  recognized  ;  and  they  rightfully  based  their  action 
on  the  mighty  preponderance  of  the  tradition  of  all  times. 

The  opinions  of  Jahn  have  always  been  characterized  by 
error.* 

It  is  not  to  be  expected  that  one  with  such  pronounced 
rationalistic  views  would  accept  the  decree  of  the  Council  of 
Trent. 

The  decree  of  Trent  formed  a  new  starting  point  for  Cath- 
olic opinion.  No  longer  did  one  question  whether  or  not 
certain  Fathers  held  these  books,  but  accepting  the  definition 
of  the  Church,  they  interpreted  it  to  have  extended  divine 
inspiration  to  all  the  books  of  the  Catholic  Canon,  and  the 
Council  of  Vatican  has  ratified  this  consensus  of  Catholic 
opinion  by  defining:  "If  anyone  shall  not  receive  all  the 
books  with  all  their  parts,  as  the  Tridentine  Synod  enumerates 
them,  as  sacred  and  canonical ;  or  shall  deny  that  they  are 
divinely  inspired,  let  him  be  anathema."f 

Protestant  opinion  has  been  consistent  in  nothing  since  its 
beginning;  it  has  varied  much  regarding  the  Canon.  The 
Gallican  Confession  of  1559,  ^^  Anglican  Confession  of  1562, 
the  confession  of  Geneva  of  1564,  declare  that  the  apocrypha 
(deuterocanonical  books)  are  useful  for  pious  reading,  but  not 
available  to  prove  doctrine.  The  conciliabulum  of  West- 
minster, in  1648  declared:  "That  the  so-called  apocryphal 
books,  being  not  divinely  inspired,  by  no  means  belong  to  the 
Canon,  wherefore  they  have  no  authority  in  the  Church  of 
God  (?),  and  are  to  be  treated  as  merely  human  writings." 

The  Biblical  Society  of  London,  declared  in  1826,  that  no 
edition  of  Scripture  was  to  be  circulated  which  contained  the 
apocrypha,  and  no  aid  was  to  be  given  to  anyone  circulating 
such  edition.  What  they  hold  to-day  on  the  Canon,  it  is  hard 
to  say. 

*Jahn  was  bom  in  Moravia  in  1750.  He  devoted  his  early  years  to  the 
study  of  Oriental  languages  and  the  Scriptures.  In  1789  he  held  the  chair  of 
Oriental  languages,  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,  and  Archaeology  in 
the  University  of  Vienna.  In  1813,  he  was  also  made  professor  of  dogma  in 
the  same  university.  He  was  a  man  of  much  erudition,  but  thoroughly  in- 
fected with  rationalism.  His  greatest  work  is  his  Introduction  to  the  Old 
Testament.  This  was  prohibited  by  the  Congregation  of  the  Index  in  1822. 
Several  other  of  hia  works  have  also  been  prohibited.     He  died  in  1816. 

f  Constit.  dogmat.  de  fide  Oath.  Can.  4,  De  Revel. 


The  New  Testament. 


Chapter  XIII. 
The  Canon  of  the  New  Testament. 

The  formation  and  preservation  of  the  Canon  of  the  New 
Testament,  is  certainly  due  to  the  direct  influence  of  divine 
Providence  moving  second  agents  to  execute  the  will  of  God. 
Still  it  was  not  the  primary  design  of  Christ  to  deliver  to  the 
world  a  written  code  of  his  doctrines.  He  inaugurated  the 
great  work  of  the  Kingdom  of  God  by  oral  preaching.  He 
wrote  nothing ;  neither  did  He  impose  any  precept  on  those 
whom  He  had  chosen  to  write.  He  bade  them  preach.  He 
redeemed  the  world  by  his  death ;  taught  it  his  Gospel  by 
word  of  mouth,  and  founded  a  living,  teaching  agency  to  carry 
on  His  work  forever.  These  were  principal.  Out  of  these 
came  the  divine  Scriptures  in  the  designs  of  Providence,  not 
to  supersede  Christ's  way  of  teaching  the  world,  but  to  be  a 
means,  a  deposit,  whence  the  Church  should  draw,  and  give  to 
the  people. 

In  fact,  all  the  terms  which  Christ  used  in  enunciating  his 
design  of  teaching  the  world,  demonstrate  that  the  principal 
and  ordinary  means  of  teaching  mankind  was  ever  to  be  the 
living  word  by  preaching.  No  other  means  would  be  adequate 
to  accomplish  that  which  Christ  willed.  The  world  of  that 
day  could  not  be  reached  through  the  medium  of  letters. 
Since  the  invention  of  printing,  and  the  general  diffusion  of 
literature,  ideas  may  be  rapidly  spread  by  the  press ;  but  the 
message  of  Christ  was  given  to  man  before  such  means  existed 
for  the  communication  of  thought.  Moreover,  the  message  of 
Christ  was  for  the  poor  and  the  illiterate,  as  well  as  for  the 
savant ;  for  busy  toilers  who  had  not  time  or  philosophical 
depth  to  draw  the  import  from  the  written  instrument,  and 
Christ  established  the  only  means  capable  of  teaching  all 
nations,  the  Magisterium  of  the  Church.  The  children  of  men 
were  lambs  who  had  need  to  be  fed,  and  Christ  gave  them  an 
eternal  succession  of  shepherds. 

(282) 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   NEW   TESTAMENT.  283 

The  Apostles  adopted  the  method  of  their  Master.  "  Aided 
by  the  illumination  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  relying  on  the  sole 
power  of  Christ,  which  wrought  many  miracles  by  them,  they 
announced  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  throughout  the  world  ; 
neither  did  they  take  thought  to  write  books,  for  they  fulfilled 
a  far  greater  and  sublimer  office.  Paul,  who  is  pre-eminent 
among  all  the  Apostles  in  richness  of  diction  and  depth  of 
thought,  wrote  nothing  except  a  few  epistles,  although  he 
could  have  expounded  many  mysteries  *  *  *  And  the  other  co- 
laborers  of  the  Lord,  the  twelve  Apostles,  the  seventy  disciples, 
and  many  others,  were  by  no  means  ignorant  (of  these  mys- 
teries). Nevertheless,  of  all  the  disciples  of  the  Lord,  only 
Matthew  and  John  left  us  a  written  word  ;  and  we  are  told 
that  they  were  moved  to  write  by  a  particular  need." 
(Euseb.  Hist.  Eccles.  HL  24). 

"  What,"  says  Irenaeus,  "  if  the  Apostles  had  not  left  us 
the  Scriptures?  Would  it  not  be  necessary  to  follow  the 
traditions  of  those  to  whom  they  committed  the  Churches. 
Verily  this  method  many  barbarous  nations  adopt,  who  believe 
in  Christ  without  ink  and  paper,  having  the  law  of  salvation 
written  in  their  hearts  by  the  Spirit,  and  faithfully  holding  to 
the  old  tradition,  believing  in  one  God,  etc."  (Irenaeus,  Migne 
7,  855).  Again:  "The  tradition  of  the  Apostles,  manifested 
in  the  whole  world,  may  be  learned  in  every  Church  by  those 
who  wish  to  know  the  truth,  and  we  can  enumerate  the  bishops 
constituted  by  the  Apostles  and  their  successors  even  to  our 
day."     (Irenaeus,  Migne,  7,  848). 

Wherefore,  they  err  greatly  who  constitute  the  Scriptures 
the  sole  means  of  teaching  Christ's  message  ;  for  many  Churches 
were  flourishing  before  there  were  any  Scriptures.  The  dates 
of  the  Gospels  can  not  be  fixed  with  precision.  For  the 
Gospel  of  Matthew,  Catholic  opinion  ranges  over  the  period 
included  between  the  years  36  and  6'j  of  the  Christian  era ;  the 
period  for  Mark  is  from  the  year  40  to  the  year  70 ;  Luke's 
Gospel  is  variously  placed  from  the  year  47  to  the  year  63, 
while  the  Gospel  of  St.  John  is  assigned  to  the  closing  years 
of  the  first  Christian  century.  Many  concur  in  the  opinion 
which  places  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  in  the  year  64  of  our  era. 

The  dates  of  some  of  the  Epistles  of  Paul  may  be  assigned 
with  a  good  degree  of  certitude.  The  Epistles  to  the  Thes- 
salonians  were  written  about  the  year  53;  the  first  Epistle  to 
the  Corinthians,  in  the  first  months  of  the  year  57 ;  the  second 
Epistle,  in  the  autumn  of  the  same  year.  The  Epistle  to  the 
Romans  was  written  toward  the  close  of  the  year  57  or  in  the 


284       THE  CANON  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

beginning  of  58 ;  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  preceded  that  to 
the  Romans,  and  ranges  between  the  year  5  5  and  57.  The  Epistle 
of  St.  Paul  to  the  Ephesians,  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians, 
and  the  Epistle  of  Philemon  are  by  Loisy  placed  during  the 
Captivity  of  Paul,  from  the  year  61  to  64.  It  is  more  difficult 
to  assign  the  proper  date  to  the  Epistles  to  Timothy,  Titus 
and  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  Modern  exegetes  are  of 
accord  in  placing  them  at  a  later  date  than  the  preceding. 
The  Epistle  of  St.  James  is  later  than  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans,  and  internal  evidence  is  therein  that  St.  James  was 
conversant  with  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  Its  probable  date 
might  be  placed  about  the  year  60.  The  Epistles  of  St.  Peter 
are  ascribed  to  the  last  years  of  his  life.  According  to  Eusebius 
and  Jerome,  the  prince  of  the  Apostles  was  martyred  in  the 
third  year  of  Nero's  reign,  about  the  year  ^"j.  The  Epistle  of 
St.  Jude  has  a  close  affinity  with  the  second  Epistle  of  St. 
Peter,  but  whether  Peter  drew  from  Jude,  or  Jude  from  Peter 
is  not  clear.  They  who  defend  the  first  hypothesis,  assign 
the  year  65  as  date  of  St.  Jude's  Epistle ;  while  the  advocates 
of  the  second  hypothesis  assign  a  later  date.  The  first  Epistle 
of  St.  John  may  be  considered  as  a  sort  of  preface  to  his 
Gospels,  and  written  at  the  same  time ;  the  second  and  third 
Epistles  are  of  a  little  later  date.  The  Apocalypse  according 
to  the  most  ancient  testimonies,  and  particularly  that  of  St. 
Irenaeus,  was  written  toward  the  close  of  the  reign  of  Domitian, 
about  the  year  95. 

Though  these  are  approximate  dates,  they  are  precise 
enough  to  establish  the  fact  that  several  years  of  intense  Apos- 
tolic work  had  elapsed,  before  the  first  writing  appeared.  And 
in  that  period  churches  had  been  founded  in  Palestine,  and 
other  parts  of  the  eastern  world,  and  probably  also  at  Rome. 
The  Church  and  the  apostolic  priesthood  was  principal ;  the 
Scriptures  were  a  means  which  the  Church  was  to  use.  But  as 
God  wished  to  provide  adequately  for  the  propagation  and 
preservation  of  the  Gospel  of  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven,  he  also 
brought  it  about  that  there  should  be  preserved  in  writing 
some  of  the  most  important  truths  of  the  New  Dispensation. 
The  spirit  of  truth  who  was  sent  to  suggest  all  things 
necessary  in  the  New  Oeconomy,  moved  the  holy  men 
to  commit  certain  things  to  writing.  But  these  writings 
owe  their  origin  to  special  occasions,  and  particular  cir- 
cumstances. Primarily  they  were  intended  for  some  one 
or  few  individuals  or  churches.  Gradually  they  became 
interchanged    and    disseminated   among    the    churches,   and 


THE   CANON   OF   THE   NEW   TESTAMENT.  286 

it  is  only  in  the  third  century  that  we  find  any  church 
having  a  complete  list  of  the  Holy  Books  of  the  New 
Law. 

We  place,  therefore,  as  a  leading  proposition,  that  the 
writers  of  the  New  Law  wrote  with  no  design  to  compile  a 
code  of  Scripture.  They  wrote  to  supply  some  particular  need, 
that  which  they  knew  to  be  the  word  of  God  ;  the  future 
destiny  of  their  writings  to  form  a  sacred  deposit  was  hidden 
from  them.  The  mode  of  the  formation  of  the  body  of 
Scriptures  of  the  New  Law  was  by  gradual  accession.  Docu- 
ments written  to  some  individual  person  or  Church  were 
copied  and  sent  to  others.  Paul  recognizes  and  makes  use  of 
this  method  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Colossians:  "And  when 
this  Epistle  is  read  among  you,  cause  that  it  be  read  also  in  the 
Church  of  the  Laodiceans ;  and  that  ye  likewise  read  the 
Epistle  from  Laodicea."     (Coloss.  IV.  i6). 

That  it  was  likewise  characteristic  of  the  early  Christians  to 
carefully  preserve  writings  of  doctrinal  import,  may  be  in- 
ferred from  a  passage  in  the  writings  of  St.  Polycarp.  "  The 
Epistles,"  he  says,  "  of  Ignatius  (martyr),  which  were  sent  us 
by  him,  and  others,  as  many  as  we  had,  we  have  sent  to  you, 
as  you  requested  ;  they  accompany  this  letter,  and  from  them 
you  will  receive  much  profit."  (S.  Polycarp.  ad  Phil.  13.)  If 
such  diligence  and  care  were  bestowed  on  the  Epistles  of 
Ignatius,  Martyr,  much  more  would  be  bestowed  on  the  writ- 
ings of  the  Apostles  and  Founders  of  Christianity.  We  see 
also  in  the  testimony  an  evidence  of  the  method  of  communi- 
cating writings  among  the  churches.  Both  agencies  combined, 
brought  it  about  that  the  several  churches  soon  had  their 
sacred  deposit  of  the  New  Law  ;  though  many  years  elapsed 
before  we  find  the  list  complete  in  any  church ;  and  many 
more,  before  all  the  churches  had  the  complete  Canon. 

Even  in  the  writings  of  the  authors  of  the  New  Testament, 
we  find  allusions  to  certain  collections  of  the  Scriptures  of  the 
New  Law.  In  his  Second  Epistle,  Peter  speaks  of  the  Epistles 
of  Paul  as  of  writings  generally  known  to  the  Christians : 
"  Wherefore,  dearly  beloved,  waiting  for  these  things,  be  dili- 
gent *  *  *  as  also  our  most  dear  brother  Paul,  according  to 
the  wisdom  given  to  him,  hath  written,  as  also  in  all  his 
Epistles,  speaking  in  them  of  these  things ;  in  which  are  some 
things  hard  to  be  understood,  which  the  unlearned  and  the 
unstable,  wrest,  as  also  the  other  Scriptures,  to  their  own  per- 
dition."    (II.  Peter  III.  14—16.) 


286        THE  CANON  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

"  In  this  place,"  says  Estius,  "  Peter  canonizes,  so  to  speak, 
Paul's  Epistles.  For  in  saying  *  as  also  the  other  Scriptures^ 
he,  in  truth,  declares  that  he  placed  them  among  the  Holy 
Scriptures." 

Cornely  adduces  a  proof  from  the  First  Epistle  to  Timothy 
to  prove  that  Paul  was  conversant  with  the  Gospel  of  Luke. 
Paul  speaks  thus  :  "  For  the  Scripture  saith,  *  Thou  shalt  not 
muzzle  the  ox  that  treadeth  out  the  corn  ' ;  and,  '  The  laborer 
is  worthy  of  his  hire.*  "  (I.  Tim.  V.  i8.)  The  first  sentence 
of  Paul's  quotation  is  taken  from  Deuteronomy  XXV.  4. 
From  the  context,  it  is  plainly  evident  to  him  who  reads  that, 
the  second  sentence  is  also  adduced  as  Holy  Scripture.  The 
passage  exists  in  Luke  X.  7,  and  the  illation  is  just  that  Paul 
quotes  here  as  divine  Scripture,  a  passage  of  the  Third  Gospel. 
Hence  we  infer  that,  at  the  writing  of  the  Epistle  to  Timothy, 
Luke's  written  Gospel  existed,  and  was  known  to  the  Christians 
as  Holy  Scripture. 

Up  to  our  times,  the  universal  belief  of  Christians  held,  that 
the  disciples  and  first  successors  of  the  Apostles  placed  the 
works  of  the  authors  of  the  New  Testament  with  the  books  of 
the  Old  Testament,  as  of  equal  divinity  and  authority.  The 
rationalistic  plague  which  infected  the  world  in  our  century, 
first  essayed  to  overthrow  this  universally  accepted  truth, 
claiming  that  the  writings  of  the  Apostles  are  never  quoted  in 
the  solema  formulas  used  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  that  the 
words  of  the  Lord  are  quoted  from  oral  tradition. 

To  meet  this  opposition,  we  must  first  set  forth  some  of 
the  characteristics  of  those  early  times. 

It  is  true  that  oral  communication  prevailed  in  those  times. 
Not  every  one  could  have  a  manuscript  of  the  written  word, 
but  all  heard  the  voice  of  those  "  who  preached  peace."  The 
intense  activity  of  the  first  teachers  of  the  New  Law  made 
Christ  and  his  Law  a  living  reality  in  every  land.  The 
Gospel  was  not  so  much  a  written  reality  as  a  living  reality. 
The  events  had  taken  place  in  no  remote  age ;  the  first  Chris- 
tians received  their  doctrine  from  those  who  announced  that 
"  which  they  had  heard,  which  they  had  seen  with  their 
eyes;  which  they  had  looked  upon,  and  their  hands  had 
handled."  Therefore,  it  is  not  to  be  expected  to  find  numer- 
ous explicit  quotations  from  the  written  deposit  in  those 
early  days.  The  early  teachers  preached  much,  and  wrote 
little.  Much  of  what  they  wrote  has  succumbed  to  the  ravages 
of  time.  They  used  the  Gospel  of  Christ,  not  so  much  as  a 
written  deposit,  but  as  a  present  living  reality,  and  part  of  the 


THE  CANON   OF  THE   NEW   TESTAMENT.  287 

life  of  the  people.  Men  of  those  days  received  the  doctrine  of 
Christ  not  from  books,  but  by  the  living  word  of  preaching ; 
they  handed  it  down  to  others  in  the  same  manner  in  which 
they  had  received  it.  But  yet  there  is  evidence  that  when  one 
of  the  Books  of  the  New  Testament  did  come  into  existence, 
it  was  recognized  as  the  word  of  God.  Those  who  received  it 
did  not  make  an  analysis  of  the  concept  of  inspiration  to 
canonize  it.  It  came  from  the  men  who  had  brought  them 
the  message  of  peace  ;  it  embodied  what  they  had  received 
from  those  who  preached  Christ  to  them,  and  this  was  its 
perfect  warrant.  Thus  the  Books  of  the  New  Law  first  came 
into  the  churches  as  individual  instruments ;  then  as  groups ; 
and,  lastly,  a  complete  list  was  formed  by  communication  be- 
tween the  churches. 

Hence,  in  the  age  immediately  succeeding  the 
Apostles,  we  find  several  of  the  books  of  our  Canon 
recognized  as  divine  Scripture. 

In  the  Epistle  vulgarly  attributed  to  St.  Barnabas,  we  find 
a  quotation  from  St.  Matthew  in  the  solemn  formula  "  sicut 
script um  est,"  (o)?  YeypaTrrai).* 

The  final  sentence  of  the  IV.  Chapter  of  this  Epistle  is  as 
follows :  "  Let  us  pay  heed  lest  we  be  found  as  it  is  written  : 
*  Many  called,  few  chosen,'  "  Now,  the  only  place  where  it  is 
thus  written  is  the  Gospel  of  Matthew  XX.  i6;  XXII.  14. 

Some  of  the  older  rationalists  considered  this  quotation  as 
an  interpolation  of  the  Latin  interpreter.  After  the  Codex 
Sinaiticus  had  overthrown  this  hypothesis,  Volkman,  Renan 

*The  Epistle  of  Barnabas  was  first  published  in  Paris  in  Greek,  and  Latin 
by  Menard  and  d'Achery,  1645,  but  not  complete.  The  entire  Greek  text  was 
first  found  by  Tischendorf  in  his  famous  Codex  Sinaiticus  in  1859.  The 
contents  of  the  letter  show  plainly  that  it  is  not  the  work  of  the  companion 
of  Paul.  Before  his  conversion,  the  author  of  the  letter  was  a  pagan  ;  for  he 
declares,  XVI.  7,  that  ' '  before  believing  in  God,  his  heart  was  full  of  idol- 
atry." Barnabas  was  a  Jew,  and  worshipped  the  true  God.  Again,  the 
author  is  not  conversant  with  Jewish  rites,  and  obligations.  Moreover,  the 
letter  speaks  of  the  punishment  of  the  Jews  in  the  destruction  of  their  Temple ; 
whereas,  critics  conclude  that  Barnabas  did  not  live  to  see  the  taking  of  Jeru- 
salem by  Titus.  But  the  value  of  the  letter  is  considerable,  even  though  not 
the  writing  of  Barnabas.  There  is  in  it  elevation  of  ideas,  and  logical  presen- 
tation of  truth.  Whoever  be  the  author,  he  touches  the  apostolic  age, 
and  cannot  be  placed  later  than  the  first  years  of  the  second  century.  The 
work  is  marred  by  excessive  allegory,  which  makes  the  writer  forget  that 
Greek  is  not  the  tongue  of  Abraham.  He  sees  a  prophecy  of  the  crucifixion 
of  Jesus  Christ,  in  the  number  of  Abraham's  servants  who  were  318  (Gen. 
XIV.  14).  The  numerical  value  of  I  (Greek)  is  10 ;  of  H,  8 ;  and  T,  300. 
IH  signifies  Jesus,  and  T  (by  its  form,)  his  cross.  Therefore,  that  Abraham 
took  318  men  with  him  in  pursuit  of  Chodorlahomor,  was  prophetic  that  Jesus 
Christ  was  to  be  crucified! 


288       THE  CANON  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

and  Strauss,  advanced  the  opinion  that  the  quotation  came 
from  IV.  Ezra,  VIII.  3  :  "  Multi  quidem  creati  sunt ;  pauci 
autem  salvabuntur."  But  a  comparison  of  the  two  texts 
clearly  evinces  Matthew  as  the  authority.  Wherefore,  Man- 
gold attempted  to  destroy  the  force  of  the  quotation  by  show- 
ing that  the  pseudo  Barnabas  quotes  Henoch  in  the  formula : 
"As  it  is  written."  But  this  would  not  prove  that  he  did 
not  consider  Matthew  divine  Scripture,  but  that  he  also  placed 
Henoch  among  the  Holy  Books.  We  admire  the  honesty  of 
Hilgenfeld,  who  concedes  that  the  author  quotes  Matthew, 
and  also  that  the  Epistle  is  of  the  year  97. 

St.  Polycarp,  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Philippians,  Chapter  XII., 
has  this  testimony  :  "As  it  is  written  in  these  Scriptures :  '  Be 
angry  and  sin  not,'  and  :  '  Let  not  the  sun  go  down  on  your 
wrath.' "  It  is  evident  that  Polycarp  here  unites  two  passages 
of  written  Scripture.  The  second  passage  is  from  the  Epistle 
of  Paul  to  the  Ephesians,  IV.  26.  As  the  proving  force  of 
this  passage  is  cogent,  the  rationalists  try  to  weaken  it  by  deny- 
ing its  authenticity.  But  its  authentic  valor  is  sufficient  to 
satisfy  all  just  criticism.  This  short  Epistle  of  Polycarp  to 
the  Philippians,  contains  according  to  Funk  (op.  cit.) 
68  allusions  to  the  New  Testament.  The  verbal  paral- 
lelism is  so  exact,  that  it  is  evident  they  were  drawn  from 
the  written  deposit.  We  here  exhibit  some  of  the  clear- 
est ones : 

Act  II.  24.  St.  Polycarp  Epist.  ad  Philip,  i. 

" —  quem  Deus  suscitavit,  solu-  " —  quern    resuscitavit    Deus, 

tis  doloribus  inferni,  juxta  quod  solutis     doloribus     inferni.      In 

impossibile     erat     teneri     ilium  quem  non  videntes  creditis,  cre- 

ab  eo."  dentes   autem  exsultatis   laetitia 

inenarrabili  et  glorificata — ." 
I.  Pet.  I.  8. 

" — quem  cum  non  videritis, 
diligitis  :  in  quem  nunc  quoque 
non  videntes  creditis  ;  credentes 
autem  exultabitis  laetitia  ine- 
narrabili et  glorificata — ." 

Epis.  II.  8—9.  Ibid. 

"  Gratia  enim  estis  salvati  per         " —  scientes,  quod  gratia  estis 

fidem,  et  hoc  non  ex  vobis:    Dei  salvati,  non  ex  operibus — ." 
enim  donum  est,  non  ex  operi- 
bus, ut  ne  quis  glorietur." 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.   OF  POLYCARP. 


289 


I.  Pet.  I.  13. 

"  Propter  quod  succincti  lum- 
bos  mentis  vestrae,  sobrii  per- 
fecte  sperate  in  earn,  quae  offer- 
tur  vobis,  gratiam,  in  revela- 
tionem  Jesu  Christi — ." 

I.  Cor.  VI.  14. 

"  Deus  vero  et  Dominum  sus- 
citavit,  et  nos  suscitabit  per 
virtutem  suam." 

I.  Pet.  III.  9. 

" — non  reddentes  malum  pro 
malo,  nee  maledictum  pro  male- 
dicto." 

Math.  VII.  1—2. 

"Nolite  judicare,  ut  non  judice- 
mini.  In  quo  enim  judicio  judi- 
caveritis,  judicabimini :  et  in  qua 
mensura  mensi  fueritis,  remetie- 
tur  vobis." 

Luke  VI.  36—38. 

Estote  ergo  misericordes,  sicut 
et  Pater  vester  misericors  est. 
Nolite  judicare,  et  non  judicabi- 
mini :  nolite  condemnare,  et  non 
condemnabimini.  Dimittite,  et 
dimittemini.  Date,  et  dabitur 
vobis  :  mensuram  bonam  et  con- 
fertam,  et  coagitatam  et  super- 
effluentem  dabunt  in  sinum  vest- 
rum.  Eadem  quippe  mensura, 
qua  mensi  fueritis,  remetietur 
vobis." 

Math.  V.  3. 

"Beati  pauperes  spiritu,  quo- 
niam  ipsorum  est  regnum  coelo- 
rum." 

Ibid.  10. 

Beati,  qui  persecutionem  patiun- 
tur  propter  justitiam,  quoniam 
ipsorum  est  regnum  coelorum." 


Ibid.  II. 

**  Propter  quod  succincti  lum- 
bos  vestros  servite  Deo  in 
timore — ." 


Ibid. 

"  Is  vero,  qui  ipsum  suscitavit 
e  mortuis,  et  nos  suscitabit — ." 


Ibid. 

" — non  reddentes  malum  pro 
malo,  nee  maledictum  pro  male- 
dicto— ." 

Ibid. 

"  —  memores  autem  eorum, 
quae  dixit  Dominus  doeens : 
*  Nolite  judicare,  ne  judicemini ; 
dimittite,  et  dimittetur  vobis ; 
miseremini,  ut  misericordiam 
consequamini;  qua  mensura  men- 
si fueritis,  remetietur  vobis' ;  et : 
'  Beati  pauperes,  et  qui  persecu- 
tionem patiuntur,  quoniam  ip- 
sorum est  regnum  Dei.' " 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.   OF  POLYCARP. 


Gal.  IV.  26. 

"  Ilia  autem,  quae  sursum  est 
Jerusalem,  libera  est,  quae  est 
mater  nostra." 


I.  Tim.  VI.  10. 

"Radix  enim  omnium  malo- 
rum  est  cupiditas. 

Ibid.  7. 

"  Nihil  enim  intulimus  in  hunc 
mundum :  baud  dubium,  quod 
nee  auferre  quid  possumus." 

Gal.  VI.  7. 

"  Nolite  errare  :  Deus  non  irri- 

detur." 

I.  Pet.  II.  II. 

" —  carissimi,  obsecro  vos 
tamquam  advenas  et  peregrines 
abstinere  vos  a  camalibus  desi- 
deriis,  quae  militant  adversus 
animam  — ." 

Rom.  XIV.  10,  12. 

"  Tu  autem,  quid  judicas  fra- 
trem  tuum  ?  aut  tu,  quare  sper- 
nis  fratrem  tuum  ?  Omnes  enim 
stabimus  ante  tribunal  Christi. 
Itaque  unusquisque  nostrum  pro 
se  rationem  reddet  Deo." 

I.  Jo.  IV.  3. 

" —  et  omnis  spiritus,  qui  sol- 
vit Jesum,  ex  Deo  non  est ;  et 
hie  est  Antichristus,  de  quo  au- 
distis,  quoniam  venit,  et  nune 
jam  in  mundo  est. 


Ibid.  III. 

"  Neque  enim  ego,  neque  alius 
mei  similis  beati  et  gloriosi  Pauli 
sapientiam  assequi  potest  ;  qui 
eum  esset  apud  vos,  coram  hom- 
inibus  tune  viventibus  perfecte 
ac  firmiter  verbum  veritatis 
docuit ;  qui  et  absens  vobis  serip- 
sit  epistolas,  in  quas  si  intuea- 
mini,  aedificari  poteritis  in  fide, 
quae  vobis  est  data,  quaeque  est 
mater  omnium  nostrum — ." 

Ibid.  IV. 

"  Prineipium  autem  omnium 
malorum  est  habendi  cupiditas." 

Ibid. 

"  Scientes  ergo,  quod  nihil  in- 
tulimus in  hunc  mundum,  sed 
nee  auferre  quid  valemus — ." 

Ibid.  V. 

"  Scientes  ergo,  quod  Deus 
non  irridetur — ." 

Ibid. 

" — quia  omnis  cupiditas  mili- 
tat  adversus  spiritum — ." 


Ibid.  VI. 

" —  omnes  ante  tribunal  Christi 
stare,  et  unumquemque  pro  se 
rationem  reddere  oportet." 


Ibid.  VII. 

**  Omnis  enim  qui  non  con- 
fessus  fuerit  Jesum  Christum  in 
came  venisse,  Antichristus  est — . " 


THE  CANON   OF   N.  T.   OF  CLEMENT  OF  ROME. 


291 


Math.  VI.  13. 

"  Et  ne  nos  inducas  in  tenta- 
tionem,  sed  libera  nos  a  malo. 
Amen," 

Ibid.  XXVI.  41. 

"  Vigilate,  et  orate,  ut  non  in- 
tretis  in  tentationem.  Spiritus 
quidem  promptus  est,  caro  autem 
infirma." 

I.  Pet.  II.  22,  24, 

*' —  qui  peccatum  non  fecit, 
nee  inventus  est  dolus  in  ore 
ejus :  qui  peccata  nostra  ipse 
pertulit  in  corpore  suo  super  lig- 
num— ." 

I.  Pet.  II.  12. 

" —  conversationem  vestram 
inter  gentes  habentes  bonam — ." 


Ibid. 

" — rogantes  omnium  conspec- 
torem  Deum,  ne  nos  inducat  in 
tentationem,  sicut  dixit  Dominus: 
'Spiritus  quidem  promptus  est, 
caro  autem  infirma.'  " 


Ibid.  VIII. 

" —  qui  peccata  nostra  in  cor- 
pore suo  super  lignum  pertulit, 
qui  peccatum  non  fecit,  nee  in- 
ventus est  dolus  in  ore  ejus — ." 


Ibid.  X. 

"  Omnes  vobis  invicem  sub- 
jecti  estote,  conversationem  ves- 
tram irreprehensibilem  habentes 
in  gentibus — ." 

Ibid.  XI. 

"An  nescimus,  quia  sancti 
mundum  judicabunt  ?  sicut  Pau- 
lus  docet.  Ego  autem  nihil  tale 
sensi  in  vobis,  vel  audivi,  in  qui- 
bus  laboravit  beatus  Paulus,  qui 
estis  in  principioEpistolaeejus." 

Among  the  genuine  works  of  St.  Clement  of  Rome  are  two 
Epistles  to  the  Corinthians,  and  two  on  Virginity.  The  two 
latter  were  assailed  by  some  rationalists,  but  they  have  been 
defended  by  such  an  excellent  critic  as  Wetstein.  The  follow- 
ing schema  exhibits  Clement's  use  of  the  New  Testament. 

St.    Clementis     Epist.    I,   ad 


I.  Cor.  VI.  2. 

"  An  nescitis,  quoniam  sancti 
de  hoc  mundo  judicabunt  ?  Et  si 
in  vobis  judicabitur  mundus,  in- 
digni  estis,  qui  de  minimis  judi- 
cetis  ? " 


Luke  VI.  36—38. 

"  Estote  ergo  misericordes,  si- 
cut et  Pater  vester  misericors  est. 
Nolite  judicare,  et  non  judica- 
bimini :  nolite  condemnare,  et 
non  condemnabimini.  Dimittite, 
et  dimittemini.  Date,  et  dabi- 
tur  vobis  :  mensuram  bonam  et 


Corinthios,  XIII. 

"Sic  enim  dixit  :  'Estote 
misericordes,  ut  misericordiam 
consequamini ;  dimittite,  ut  di- 
mittatur  vobis  ;  sicut  facitis,  ita 
vobis  fiet ;  sicut  datis,  ita  da- 
bitur  vobis  ;  sicut  judicatis,  ita 
judicabimini ;    sicut    indulgetis 


292 


THE  CANON   OF  N.  T.   OF  CLEMENT  OF  ROME. 


confertain,  et  coagitatam  et  su- 
pereffluentem  dabunt  in  sinum 
vestrum.  Eadem  quippe  men- 
sura,  qua  mensi  fueritis,  remetie- 
tur  vobis,' " 

Math.  XXVI.  24. 

"  Filius  quidem  hominis  vadit, 
sicut  scriptum  est  de  illo  :  vae 
autem  homini  illi,  per  quem  Fi- 
lius hominis  tradetur :  bonum 
erat  ei,  si  natus  non  fuisset  homo 
iUe." 

Luke  XVII.  2. 

"  Utilius  est  illi,  si  lapis  mola- 
ris  imponatur  circa  collum  ejus, 
et  projiciatur  in  mare,  quam  ut 
scandalizet  unum  de  pusillis 
istis." 

I.  Paul,  I.  Cor.  12. 

"  Hoc  autem  dico,  quod  unus- 
quisque  vestrum  dicit :  Ego  qui- 
dem sum  Pauli :  ego  autem 
Apollo  :  ego  vero  Cephae  :  ego 
autem  Christi." 


I.  Peter  IV.  8. 

"  Ante  omnia  autem,  mutuam 
in  vobismetipsis  caritatem  con- 
tinuam  habentes,  quia  caritas 
operit     multitudinem     peccato- 


ita  vobis  indulgebitur  ;  qua  men- 
sura  metimini,  in  ea  mensura- 
bitur  vobis.' " 


Ibid.  XLVI. 

"  Recordamini  verborum  Jesu 
Domini  nostri.  Dixit  enim  : 
*Vae  homini  illi :  bonum  erat  ei, 
si  natus  non  fuisset,  quam  ut 
unum  ex  electis  meis  scandali- 
zaret :  melius  erat,  ut  ei  mola 
circumponeretur,  et  in  mare  de- 
mergeretur,  quam  ut  unum  de 
pusillis  meis  scandalizaret.'" 


Ibid.  XLVII. 

"  Sumite  Epistolam  beati  Pauli 
Apostoli.  Quid  primum  vobis  in 
principio  Evangelii  scripsit  ? 
Profecto  in  Spiritu  ad  vos  litteras 
dedit  de  seipso  et  Cepha  et 
Apollo,  quia  etiam  tum  diversa 
in  studia  scissi  eratis." 

Ibid.  XLIX. 

"  Charitas  nos  Deo  agglutinat: 
charitas  operit  multitudinem  pec- 
catorum :  charitas  omnia  sus- 
tinet — ." 


Math.  IX.  13. 

"  Euntes  autem  discite,  quid 
est :  Misericordiam  volo,  et  non 
sacrificium.  Non  enim  veni  vo- 
cari  justos,  sed  peccatores." 

Ibid.  X.  32. 

"  Omnis  ergo,  qui  confitebitur 
me  coram  hominibus,  confitebor 
et  ego  eum  coram  Patre  meo,  qui 
in  coelis  est  — ." 


St.    dementis     Epist.    II.    ad 
Corinthios,  II, 

"  Alia  quoque  Scriptura  dicit : 
*  Non  veni  vocare  justos,  sed  pec- 
catores— .' " 

Ibid.  III. 

*'  Ait  vero  etiam  ipse  :  'Qui 
me  confessus  fuerit  in  conspectu 
hominum,  confitebor  ipsum  in 
conspectu  Patris  mei.'  " 


THE  CANON   OF  N.  T.   OF  CLEMENT  OF  ROME. 


293 


Ibid.  VII.  21. 

"  Non  omnis,  qui  dicit  mihi : 
Domine,  Domine,  intrabit  in  reg- 
num  coelorum,  sed  qui  facit  vo- 
luntatem  Patris  mei,  qui  in  coelis 
est,  ipse  intrabit  in  regnum  coe- 
lorum." 

Ibid.  VII.  23. 

"  Et  tunc  confitebor  illis  :  Quia 
nunquam  novi  vos  :  discedite  a 
me,  qui  operamini  iniquitatem." 


Math.  X.  28. 

"  Et  nolite  timere  cos,  qui  oc- 
cidunt  corpus,  animam  aulem 
non  possunt  occidere,  sed  potius 
timete  eum,  qui  potest  et  animam 
et  corpus  perdere  in  gehennam." 


Math.  VI.  24. 

"  Nemo  potest  duobus  dominis 
servire  : 

Math.  XVI.  26. 

**  Quid  enim  prodest   homini, 
si  mundum  universum  lucretur, 


Ibid.  IV. 

"  Non  modo  igitur  ipsum  vo- 
cemus  Dominum  ;  id  enim  non 
salvabit  nos  ;  siquidem  ait :  '  Non 
omnis  qui  dicit  mihi,  Domine, 
Domine,  salvabitur ;  sed  qui 
facit  justitiam.' " 

Ibid. 

"  Idcirco,  nobis  haec  facien- 
tibus,  dixit  Dominus  :  *Si  fueritis 
mecum  congregati  in  sinu  meo, 
et  non  feceritis  mandata  mea, 
abjiciam  vos,  et  dicam  vobis  : 
Discedite  a  me  ;  nescio  vos  unde 
sitis,  operarii  iniquitatis.'  "* 

Ibid.  V. 

"Ait  enim  Dominus:  'Eritis 
velut  agni  in  medio  luporum.' 
Respondens  autem  Petrus  ei 
dicit :  *  Si  ergo  lupi  agnos  dis- 
cerpserint  ? '  Dixit  Jesus  Petro: 
*  Ne  timeant  agni  post  mortem 
suam  lupos  :  et  vos  nolite  timere 
eos  qui  occidunt  vos,  et  nihil 
vobis  possunt  facere  ;  sed  timete 
eum,  qui  postquam  mortui  fuer- 
itis, habet  potestatem  animae  et 
corporis,  ut  mittat  in  gehennam 
ignis."f 

Ibid.  VI. 

"  Dicit  autem  Dominus  :  Nul- 
lus  servus  potest  duobus  dominis 
servire." 

Ibid. 

"  Si  nos  volumus  et  Deo  ser- 
vire et  mammonae,  inutile  nobis 


*Clement  is  wont  to  unite  passages  from  the  several  Gospels  into  one 
quotation.  In  the  present  instance,  he  has  taken  the  first  part  of  the  quota- 
tion from  some  apocryphal  gospel. 

fMost  of  the  passage  is  taken  from  some  apocryphal  gospel.  The  test  of 
time  and  judgment  of  the  Church  had  not  yet  distinguished  between  the 
genuine  and  the  apocryphal  books  of  Holy  Scripture.  But  the  citation  of  some 
apocryphal  books  weakens  not  Clement's  testimony  to  prove  that  the  books 
of  our  Canon  existed  then  as  written  instruments,  though  some  apocrypha 
were  mingled  with  them. 


294  THE  CANON  OF  N.   T.   OF  CLEMENT  OF  ROME. 


animae  vero  suae  detrimentum 
patiatur  ?  Aut  quam  dabit  homo 
commutationem  pro  anima  sua?" 


This  passage  is  also  quoted  by 
Irenaeus,  Lib.  II,  64,  as  a  saying 
of  the  Lord.  Grabe  believes  it 
to  be  from  the  apocryphal  gospel 
according  to  the  Hebrews. 

Math.  XII.  50. 

"  Quicumque  enim  fecerit  vo- 
luntatem  Patris  mei,  qui  in  coelis 
est,  ipse  meus  f rater  et  soror,  et 
mater  est." 

Math.  V.  x6. 

"  Sic  luceat  lux  vestra  coram 
hominibus,  ut  videant  opera 
vestra  bona,  et  glorificent  patrem 
vestrum,  qui  in  coelis  est." 

St.  Paul  ad  Ephes.  V.  6. 

"  Nemo  vos  seducat  inanibus 
verbis:  propter  haec  enim  venit 
ira  Dei  in  filios  diffidentiae." 

II.  Tim.  III.  5. 

**  —  habentes  speciem  quidem 
pietatis,  virtutem  autem  ejus  ab- 
negantes.     Et  hos  devita — ." 

I.  Cor.  VII.  34. 

"  Et  mulier  innupta  et  virgo 
cogitat,  quae  Domini  sunt,  ut  sit 
sancta  corpore  et  spiritu.  Quae 
autem  nupta  est  cogitat  quae 
sunt  mundi,  quomodo  placeat 
viro." 

Luke  VII.  28. 

"  Dico  enim  vobis  :  Major  in- 
ter natos  mulierum  propheta 
Joanne  Baptista  nemo  est :  qui 
autem  minor  est  in  regno  Dei, 
major  est  illo. 


est.  Nam  '  quae  utilitas,  si  quis 
universum  mundum  lucretur, 
animam  autem  detrimento  affi- 
ciat.'" 

Ibid.  VIII. 

"  Ait  quippe  Dominus  in  Evan- 
gelio  :  '  Si  parvum  non  servastis, 
quis  magnum  vobis  dabit  ?  Dico 
enim  vobis  :  Qui  fidelis  est  in 
minimo,  et  in  majori  fidelis  est." 

Ibid.  IX. 

"  Etenim  Dominus  dixit : 
'  Fratres  mei  sunt  ii  qui  faciunt 
voluntatem  Patris  mei.'  " 

St.  Clementis  Epist.  I.  ad 
Virgines,  II. 

*' —  sicque  adimplentur  Christi 
verba  :  *  Videant  opera  vestra 
bona,  et  glorificent  Patrem  ves- 
trum qui  in  coelis  est.'  " 

Ibid.  III. 

**  Itaque  nemo  vos  seducat 
inanibus  verbis — ." 

Ibid. 

" —  de  talibus  enim  scriptum 
est :  '  Habentes  speciem  quidem 
pietatis,  virtutem  autem  ejus 
abnegantes.' " 

Ibid.  V. 

"  Solicita  sit  necesse  est  quae 
Domini  sunt,  quomodo  placeat 
Deo,  ut  sit  sancta  corpore  et 
spiritu." 


Ibid.  VI. 

"  Angelus  fuit  Joannes  :  talem 
esse  decebat  Domini  nostri  prae- 
cursorem,  quo  major  non  fuit 
inter  natos  mulierum." 


THE  CANON   OF   N.   T.   OF  CLEMENT   OF   ROME. 


296 


Phil.  IV.  3. 

"Etiam  rogo  et  te,  germane 
compar,  adjuva  illas,  quae  mecum 
laboraverunt  in  Evangelic  cum 
Clemente,  et  ceteris  adjutoribus 
meis,  quorum  nomina  sunt  in 
libro." 

Heb.  XIII.  7. 

"  Mementote  praepositorum 
vestrorum,  qui  vobis  locuti  sunt 
verbum  Dei,  quorum  intuentes 
exitum  conversationis,  imitamini 
fidem." 

I.  Cor.  IV.  16. 

"  Rogo  ergo  vos  :  Imitatores 
mei  estote,  sicut  et  ego  Christi." 


Ibid. 

*'  Eamdem  viam  amplexati 
sunt  et  Paulus,  et  Barnabas,  et 
Timotheus,  quorum  nomina  sunt 
in  libro  vitae — ." 


Ibid. 

"  Scriptumest  enim:  'Memen- 
tote praepositorum  vestrorum, 
quorum  intuentes  exitum  conver- 
sationis, imitamini  fidem.'" 


Ibid. 

"  Et  alibi  dictum  est :  *  Imi- 
tatores mei  estote,  fratres,  sicut 
et  ego  Christi.'" 

In  the  Eighth  Chapter  of  this  First  Epistle  of  Clement  to 
Virgins,  ten  phrases  occur  bearing  on  them  clearest  evidence 
that  they  are  taken  from  the  Pauline  Epistles,  such  as  for 
instance,  "  avarice  which  is  the  serving  of  idols."    (Ephes.  V.  5.) 

Jo.  III.  6.  Ibid.  VIII. 

**  Quod  natum   est  ex   came,  "  Carnales     sunt    isti    omnes 

caro  est,  et  quod  natum  est  ex      eorumque  similes  :     '  quod  enim 


spiritu,  spiritus  est." 

Ibid.  31. 

"  Qui  desursum  venit,  super 
omnes  est.  Qui  est  de  terra,  de 
terra  est,  et  de  terra  loquitur. 
Qui  de  coelo  venit,  super  omnes 
est." 

Rom.  VIII.  7. 

" — Quoniam  sapientia  camis 
inimica  est  Deo ;  legi  enim  Dei 
non  est  subjecta,  nee  enim  po- 
test." 

Rom.  VIII.  9. 

" —  Si  quis  autem  Spiritum 
Christi  non  habet,  hie  non  est 
ejus." 

I.  Cor.  V.  II. 

" —  cum  ejusmodi  nee  cibum 
sumere." 


natum  est  de  came  caro  est ; 
qui  est  de  terra,  de  terra  est,  et 
de  terra  loquitur,  et  terrena 
sapit : '  *  quae  sapientia  inimica 
est  Deo  :  legi  enim  Dei  non  est 
subjecta,  nee  enim  potest — .'  " 


Ibid. 

" —  si  quis  autem  Spiritum 
Christi  non  habet,  hie  non  est 
ejus." 

Ibid.  X. 

"  Cum  ejusmodi  suademus  ne 
cibum  quidem  sumere." 


296 


THE  CANON   OF   N.   T.   OF  CLEMENT   OF   ROME. 


II.  Thess.  III.  II — 12. 

"Audivimus  enim,  inter  vos 
quosdam  ambulare  inquiete,  nihil 
operantes,  sed  curiose  agentes. 
lis  autem,  qui  ejusmodi  sunt,  de- 
nuntiamus,  et  obsecramus  in  Do- 
mino Jesu  Christi,  ut  cum  silen- 
tio  operantes,  suum  panem  man- 
ducent." 


I.  Tim.  I.  7. 

" — volentes  esse  legis  doc- 
tores,  non  intelligentes  neque 
quae  loquuntur,  neque  de  quibus 
affirmant." 

I.  Cor.  XII.  28. 

"  Et  quosdam  quidem  posuit 
Deus  in  ecclesia  primum  Aposto- 
los,  secundo  Prophetas,  tertio 
Doctores — ." 

St.  Jac.  III.  2. 

"In  multis  enim  offendimus 
omnes.  Si  quis  in  verbo  non 
offendit,  hie  perfectus  est  vir ; 
potest  etiam  freno  circumducere 
totum  corpus." 

I.  Pet.  IV.  II. 

"  Si  quis  loquitur,  quasi  ser- 
mones  Dei — ." 

Coloss.  IV.  6. 

"  Sermo  vester  semper  in  gratia 
sale  sit  conditus,  ut  sciatis,  quo- 
modo  oporteat  vos  unicuique  re- 
spondere." 

Rom.  XVL  18. 

"  Hujuscemodi  enim  Christo 
Domino  nostro  non  serviunt,  sed 
suo  ventri ;  et  per  dulces  sermo- 
nes  et  benedictiones  seducunt 
corda  innocentium." 


Ibid. 

"  Sed  reipsa  sola  ducuntur 
otiositate,  cum  sint  ipsi  non 
solum  otiosi,  sed  et  verbosi,  et 
curiosi,  loquentes  quae  non  opor- 
tet.  Hi,  per  dulces  sermones, 
quaestum  venantur  in  nomine 
Christi.  Hos  sinistra  praefigit 
nota  divinus  Apostolus  multa 
mala  in  eis  redarguens." 

Ibid.  XI. 

"Sed  sunt  inquieti,  non  in- 
telligentes quae  loquuntur,  neque 
de  quibus  affirmant." 


Ibid. 

"  Hanc  autem  viam  multi 
sequuntur,  quia  non  animadver- 
tunt  quod  scriptum  est :  '  Non 
multos  in  vobis,  fratres,  positos 
esse  doctores  et  prophetas ';  et 
iterum  :  '  Si  quis  in  verbo  non 
offendit,  hie  perfectus  est  vir. 
Potest  etiam  freno  circumducere 
totum  corpus.  Si  quis  loquitur, 
quasi  sermones  Dei — .'  " 


Ibid. 

" —  et  iterum  :  Sermo  vester 
semper  in  gratia  sale  sit  con- 
ditus, ut  sciatis  quomodo  opor- 
teat vos  unicuique  respondere— ." 

Ibid. 

"  Quidam  tandem  beatum  po- 
pulum  dicunt,  et  per  dulces 
sermones  et  benedictiones,  sedu- 
cunt corda  innocentium." 


THE  CANON   OF  N.   T.   OF   CLEMENT   OF   ROME. 


297 


Math.  XV.  14. 

**  Sinite  illos :  caeci  sunt,  et 
duces  caecorum  :  caecus  autem 
si  caeco  ducatum  praestet,  ambo 
in  foveam  cadunt." 

This  is  a  scriptural  mosaic 
made  up  of  Galat.  V.  10  ;  Jas. 
III.  15  ;  I.  Cor.  11.  4 ;  and  Ephes. 
II.  2  : 

"  —  in  quibus  aliquando  am- 
bulastis  secundum  saeculum 
mundi  hujus,  secundum  princi- 
pem  potestatis  aeris  hujus,  spiri- 
tus,  qui  nunc  operatur  in  filios 
diffidentiae." 

Math.  XVII.  20. 

"Hoc  autem  genus  non  ejici- 
tur  nisi  per  orationem  et  jeju- 
nium." 


Math.  X.  8. 

"  Infirmos  curate,  mortuos  sus- 
citate,  leprosos  mandate,  daemo- 
nes  ejicite  :  gratis  accepistis,  gra- 
tis date." 

Mat.  XXV.  36. 

"  —  nudus,  et  cooperuistis  me  : 
infirmus,  et  visitastis  me  :  in  car- 
cere  eram,  et  venistis  ad  me." 


II.  Cor.  XI.  29. 

*'  Quis  infirmatur,  et  ego  non 
infirraor  ?  quis  scandalizatur,  et 
ego  non  uror  ?  " 

Math.  IX.  37—38. 

**  Tunc  dicit  discipulis  suis  : 
Messis  quidem  multa,    operarii 


Ibid. 

"  Hi  sunt  veluti  caecus  qui 
caeco  ducatum  praestat,  quique 
ambo  in  foveam  cadunt." 

Ibid. 

"Hi  portabunt  judicium,  quia 
sapientiam  animalem  vanumque 
mendacium  garruli  inanique 
scientia  infiati  praedicant  in  per- 
suasibilibus  humanae  sapientiae 
verbis,  secundum  saeculum  mun- 
di hujus,  secundum  principem 
potestatis  aeris  hujus,  spiritus 
qui  operatur  in  filios  diffidentiae, 
et  non  secundum  doctrinam 
Christi." 

Ibid.  XII. 

" —  non  enim  agunt  cum  recta 
fide,  et  juxta  doctrinam  Domini 
qui  dixit :  '  Hoc  genus  daemoni- 
orum  non  ejicitur  nisi  per  or- 
ationem et  jejunium.'  " 

Ibid. 

"Vos  igitur  quibus  dictum 
est :  '  Gratis  accepistis,  gratis 
date—.'  " 

Ibid. 

**  Praeclarum  ac  utile  est  ut 
servi  Domini  morem  gerant,  in- 
ter caetera  similia,  huic  praecepto 
divino  :  '  Infirmus  eram,  et  visi- 
tastis me.'  " 

Ibid. 

" — memores  verborum  Apos- 
toli  :  '  Quis  infirmatur,  et  ego 
non  infirmor  ?  Quis  scandali- 
zatur, et  ego  non  uror  ?'  " 

Ibid.  XIII. 

"Memores  enim  esse  debent 
messem  ■  quidem    esse    multam. 


298 


THE   CANON   OF   N.   T.   OF  CLEMENT   OF   ROME. 


autem  pauci.  Rogate  ergo  Do- 
minum  messis,  ut  mittat  opera- 
rios  in  messem  suam." 

Jo.  VI.  27. 

"Operamini  non  cibum,  qui 
perit,  sed  qui  permanet  in  vitam 
aeternam — ." 

Luke  I.  75. 

" — in  sanctitate  et  justitia  co- 
ram ipso  omnibus  diebus  nostris." 

Coloss.  I.  10. 

" —  ut  ambuletis  digne  Deo 
per  omnia  placentes — ." 

II.  Cor.  VIII.  21. 

"  Providemus  enim  bona  non 
solum  coram  Deo,  sed  etiam  co- 
ram hominibus." 

I.  Tim.  II.  3. 

"  Hoc  enim  bonum  est  et  ac- 
ceptum  coram  Salvatore  nostro 
Deo  — ." 

II.  Cor.  VI.  3. 

"  Nemini  dantes  ullam  offen- 
sionem,  ut  non  vituperetur  mini- 
sterium  nostrum — " 


II.  Cor.  V.  II. 

**  Scientes  ergo  timorem  Do- 
mini hominibus  suademus,  Deo 
autem  manifesti  sumus." 

I.  Tim.  V.  10. 

" —  in  operibus  bonis  testimo- 
nium habens,  si  filios  educavit, 
si  hospitio  recepit,  si  sanctorum 
pedes  lavit,  si  tribulationem  pa- 
tientibus  subministravit,  si  omne 
opus  bonum  subsecuta  est. 


operarios  autem  paucos  :  ideoque 
rogent  Dominum  messis  ut  mittat 
operarios  in  messem  suam — ." 

Ibid. 

"  —  operarios  qui  operentur 
non  cibum  qui  perit,  sed  qui  per- 
manet in  vitam  aeternam — ." 

Ibid. 

"  Sic  Domino  serviemus  in 
sanctitate  et  justitia  coram  ipso, 
per  omnia  placentes,  providentes 
bona,  non  solum  coram  Deo,  sed 
etiam  coram  hominibus  :  hoc 
enim  bonum  est  et  acceptum — ." 


St.    Clementis    Epist.    II.    ad 
Virgines,  III. 

*' —  solliciti  quippe  sumus  ne 
quis  in  nobis  ofifendatur  aut 
scandalizetur  :  Nemini  dantes 
ullam  offensionem,  ut  non  vitu- 
peretur ministerium  nostrum." 

Ibid. 

"  Scientes  ergo  timorem  Domi- 
ni, hominibus  suademus ;  Deo 
autem  manifesti  sumus." 

Ibid.  IV. 

"  Haec  autem  prae  aliis  senes- 
cens  mulier  eligitur  quae  diu  pro- 
bata est  assiduitate  medita- 
tionum,  hincque  perspecta  si 
filios  educavit,  si  hospitio  re- 
cepit, si  sanctorum  pedes  lavit." 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  OF  CLEMENT  OF  ROME. 


299 


I.  Cor.  X.  33. 

" —  sicut  et  ego  per  omnia  om- 
nibus placeo,  non  quaerens,  quod 
mihi  utile  est,  sed  quod  multis, 
ut  salvi  fiant." 

Rom.  XIV.  15. 

"  Si  enim  propter  cibum  frater 
tuus  contristatur,  jam  non  secun- 
dum caritatem  ambulas.  Noli 
cibo  tuo  ilium  perdere,  pro  quo 
Christus  mortuus  est." 

I.  Cor.  VIII.  12. 

"  Sic  autem  peccantes  in  fra- 
tres,  et  percutientes  conscientiam 
eorum  infirmam,  in  Christum  pec- 
catis." 

Math.  X.  16. 

"  Ecce,  ego  mitto  vos  sicut 
oves  in  medio  luporum.  Estote 
ergo  prudentes  sicut  serpentes, 
et  simplices  sicut  columbae." 

Ephes,  V.  15 — 16. 

"  Videte  itaque,  fratres,  quo- 
modo  caute  ambuletis  :  non  quasi 
insipientes,  sed  ut  sapientes." 

Math.  VII.  6. 

"  Nolite  dare  sanctum  cani- 
bus :  neque  mittatis  margaritas 
vestras  ante  porcos — ." 

I.  Cor.  X.  12. 

"  Itaque,  qui  se  existimat  stare, 
videat,  ne  cadat." 

I.  Tim.  V.  II. 

"Adolescentiores  autem  viduas 
devita :  cum  enim  luxuriatae 
fuerint  in  Christo,  nubere  vo- 
lunt  — ." 


Joa.  IV.  27. 

"  Et  continuo  venerunt  dis- 
cipuli  ejus  et  mirabantur,  quia 
cum  muliere  loquebatur,  etc." 


Ibid.  V. 

" — nee  quaerimus  quod  nobis 
utile  est,  sed  quod  multis,  ut 
salvi  fiant." 

Ibid. 

"  Hinc  Paulus  :  '  Noli  cibo 
tuo,  inquit,  ilium  perdere  pro 
quo  Christus  mortuus  est  ;'  et 
alibi :  *  Sic  autem  peccantes  in 
fratres,  et  percutientes  conscien- 
tiam eorum  infirmam,  in  Chris- 
tum peccatis.*  " 


Ibid  VI. 

" —  debemus  esse  prudentes 
sicut  serpentes,  et  simplices  sicut 
columbae,  non  quasi  insipientes, 
sed  ut  sapientes  — ." 


Ibid. 

'* —  ne  demus  sanctum  cani- 
bus,  mittamusque  margaritas  ante 
porcos  — ." 

Ibid.  XIII. 

"Et  iterum  :  Qui  se  existimat 
stare,  videat  ne  cadat." 

Ibid.  XIV. 

"Nullum  porro  sanctum  anim- 
advertetis  frequenter  fuisse  con- 
versatum  cum  virginibus  aut 
adolescentioribus  virorum  uxori- 
bus  vel  viduis,  quas  devitandas 
esse  divinus  docet  Apostolus." 

Ibid.  XV. 

"  De  ipso  Domino  Jesu  Christo 
scriptum  est,  quod  venientes  dis- 
cipuli,    et   videntes    eum    prope 


300  THE   CANON   OF   N.   T.   OF   CLEMENT   OF   ROME. 

fontem  seorsim  cum  Samaritana 
sermocinantem  mirabantur  quia 
cum  muliere  loquebatur." 
Therefore  the  Fourth  Gospel  scriptum  est,  and  was  recog- 
nized as  Holy  Scripture  in  Clement's  time. 
Jo.  XX.  17.  Ibid. 

"  Dicit  ei  Jesus  :  Noli  me  tan-  Insuper,  postquam  Dominus  a 

gere,  nondum  enim  ascendi  ad  mortuis  surrexit,  cum  Maria  ad 
Patrem  meum  :  vade  autem  ad  sepulcrum  properasset,  eumque 
fratres  meos,  et  die  eis  :  Ascendo  adorans,  ipsius  pedes  tenere  vo- 
ad  Patrem  meum  et  Patrem  ves-  luisset:  'Noli,  inquit,  me  tangere: 
trum,  Deum  meum  et  Deum  ves-  nondum  enim  ascendi  ad  Patrem 
trum,"  meum.' " 

Phil.  III.  16.  Ibid.  XVI. 

"  Verumtamen  ad  quod  perve-  "  Idcirco,  fratres,  rogamus,  vos 

nimus,  ut  idem  sapiamus,  et  in  in  Domino,  ut  idem  sapiamus, 
eadem  permaneamus  regula."  et   in    eadem   permaneamus   re- 

gula-." 

I.  Jo.  IV.  6.  Ibid. 

"  Nos   ex    Deo    sumus.      Qui  "  Qui  novit  Deum,  audit  nos  : 

non  est  ex  Deo,  non  audit  nos,  qui  non  est  ex  Deo,  non  audit 
etc."  nos." 

We  have  only  selected  some  of  the  clearest  quotations 
from  our  books.  Many  more  allusions  to  New  Testament 
books  exist  in  Clement's  works. 

Eusebius  testifies  that  Clement,  in  his  First  Epistle  to  the 
Corinthians, "  gives  many  sentiments  taken  from  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews,  and  also  literally  quoting  the  words,  he  most 
clearly  shows  that  this  work  is  by  no  means  a  late  production. 
Whence  it  is  probable  that  this  was  also  numbered  with  the 
other  writings  of  the  Apostles."  (Hist.  Eccles.  III.  38.) 
More  than  twenty  texts,  some  of  them  of  considerable  length, 
are  found  in  Clement's  Epistle,  which  in  the  sense  and  order 
of  the  words  agree  with  the  Epistle  to  Hebrews. 

Those  who  would  still  contend  that  these  quotations  come 
from  oral  tradition,  merit  to  be  classed  with  those  of  whom 
divine  Dante  sings  :  *'  Non  ragioniam  di  loro,  ma  guarda  e 
passa."  "  Let  us  not  speak  of  them,  but  look,  and  pass." 
(Inferno  III.  51.) 

The  works  of  Clement  show  that  at  Rome,  toward  the  close 
of  the  first  century,  at  least  the  Four  Gospels,  Eleven  Epistles 
of  Paul,  the  First  Epistle  of  Peter,  the  First  Epistle  of  John, 
and  the  Epistle  of  St.  James  were  known  and  recognized  as 
Holy  Scripture. 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.   OF  IGNATIUS.  301 

The  testimony  of  BASILIDES,  a  heretic  of  the  first  part  of 
the  second  century,  confirms  the  existence  of  the  written 
Gospels,  and  certain  of  Paul's  Epistles.  According  to  Euse- 
bius  (Hist.  Eccles.  IV.  7).  Basilides  edited  a  commentary  on 
the  Evangelium.  In  the  Philosophoumena,  VII.  20,  we  find 
this  testimony :  *  Basilides  said  that  out  of  nothing  (e/c  ovk 
ovTcov)  was  made  the  germ  of  the  universe,  the  word,  as  it  is 
said :  "  Let  there  be  light ";  and  this  is  what  is  said  in  t/ie 
Gospels :  '  He  was  the  true  light  that  enlighteneth  every  man 
that  Cometh  into  this  world.'  "  Quotations  from  the  Pauline 
Epistles  are  often  used  by  Basilides  with  the  formulas  :  "  It 
is  written,"  "The  Scripture  saith."  According  to  Origen, 
Basilides  commented  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  In  Origen's 
Commentary  on  Romans,  Lib.  V.  i,  we  find  the  following: 

"  Sed  haec  Basilides  non  advertens  de  lege  naturali  debere 
intelligi,  ad  ineptas  et  impias  fabulas  sermonem  apostolicum 
traxit,  et  in  fMerevaoy/xaTMaea)'?  dogma,  id  est,  quod  animae  in 
alia  atque  alia  corpora  transfundantur,  ex  hoc  Apostoli  dicto 
conatur  astruere.  Dixit  enim,  inquit,  Apostolus,  quia  '  ego 
vivebam  sine  lege  aliquando  ' :  hoc  est,  antequam  in  istud 
corpus  venirem,  in  ea  specie  corporis  vixi,  quae  sub  lege  non 
esset ;  pecudis  scilicet,  vel  avis.  Sed  non  respexit  ad  id  quod 
sequitur,  id  est:  'Sed  ubi  venit  mandatum,  peccatum  revixit.' 
Non  enim  dixit  se  venisse  ad  mandatum,  sed  ad  se  venisse 
mandatum  ;  et  peccatum  non  dixit  non  fuisse  in  se,  sed  mor- 
tuum  fuisse,  et  revixisse.  In  quo  utique  ostendit  quod  de  una 
eademque  vita  sua  utrumque  loqueretur.  Verum  Basilides,  et 
si  qui  cum  ipso  hoc  sentiunt,  in  sua  impietate  relinquantur." 

The  works  of  IGNATIUS,  (martyr)  reveal  that  he  was  con- 
versant with  a  written  code  of  the  New  Law.  However,  not 
all  the  texts  that  are  usually  brought  forward  from  Ignatius* 
works,  are  valid  to  prove  that  he  spoke  of  a  written  Gospel. 
The  first  text  is  taken  from  the  fifth  chapter  of  his  Epistle  to 
those  of  Smyrna :  "  Fools  deny  him  (Jesus  Christ)  *  *  * 
whom  the  prophets  could  not  convince,  nor  the  Law  of  Moses, 
nor  the  Gospel,  even  to  this  day."  Although  I  believe,  that 
Ignatius  here  speaks  of  a  written  Gospel,  nevertheless,  in  con- 
troversy it  could  be  maintained  that  the  words  would  be 
apposite,  even  though  the  oral  teaching  of  Christ  alone  existed. 

The  next  passage  is  from  the  seventh  chapter  of  the  same 
Epistle  :  "  It  behooves  us  *  *  *  to  pay  heed  to  the  Prophets, 
and  especially  to  the  Gospel  wherein  the  Passion  is  taught  us, 
and  the  Resurrection  perfectly  demonstrated."  This  is  some- 
what cogent,  but  not  apodictic.     It  is  certainly  far  more  prob- 


302  THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.   OF  IGNATIUS. 

able  that  Ignatius,  in  placing  together  these  two  sources  of 
doctrine  in  the  present  phrase,  spoke  of  two  things  of  similar 
nature,  both  being  written  instruments. 

The  next  testimony  of  Ignatius  is  taken  from  Ignatius* 
Epistle  to  those  of  Philadelphia,  VIII.-IX. :  "  I  hear  certain 
ones  saying:  '  'Eai/  ixrj  ev  Tol<i  ap^^eioi^  evpa,  iv  ra  evayyeXio),  ov 
TTiarevco.'  And  when  I  say  to  them  that  it  is  written,  they 
answer :  this  is  to  be  demonstrated.  But  my  archives  are 
Jesus  Christ,  my  spotless  archives  are  his  cross,  his  death,  his 
resurrection,  and  the  faith  which  comes  from  him.  *  *  *  The 
priests  are  good,  but  the  High  Priest  is  better  *  *  * 
through  whom  the  Prophets  and  the  Apostles  and  the  Church 
enters  (into  the  Holy  of  Holies).  But  the  Gospel  has  some- 
thing of  special  excellence,  to  wit :  the  advent  of  Our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  his  Passion  and  Resurrection.  The  beloved 
Prophets  announced  him  ;  but  the  Gospel  is  the  perfection  of 
eternal  life." 

The  key  to  this  testimony  consists  in  the  Greek  passage. 
Some  expunge  the  comma  after  the  to  evayyeXitp  and  translate 
it :  Unless  I  find  evidence  in  the  ancient  writings,  I  will  not 
believe  the  Gospel.  This  version  is  rejected  by  Funk, 
(Patres  Apost.  i,  230),  Comely  (Introduction  I.  159),  and 
Loisy  (Canon  du  Nouveau  Test.,  28).  They  insist  on  the  fact 
that  the  laws  of  the  Greek  language  permit  not  such  sense. 
They  instead  place  ra  evayyeXico  in  opposition  to  Totf;  apxeioa 
in  which  case,  it  would  certainly  refer  to  a  written  Gospel. 
Though  the  Greek  construction  is  somewhat  rough,  I  am  dis- 
posed to  accept  the  first  opinion.  The  context  and  line  of 
argument  evince  that  Ignatius  was  arguing  against  those  who 
demanded  an  excessive  verification  of  prophecy  for  faith  in 
the  Gospel.  The  ra  apx^ta  were  the  prophecies  of  the  Old 
Law.  Against  them  he  first  responds,  that  the  doctrines  of 
the  New  Law  are  founded  on  the  prophecies.  And  then  to 
their  cavils,  he  exclaims  that  for  him  there  is  no  need  of 
prophecy  to  substantiate  New  Testament  teaching.  For 
Christ  and  the  Cross  merit  faith,  irrespective  of  prophecy. 
Finally,  he  says,  as  Jesus  Christ  is  greater  than  the  Prophets, 
so  the  Gospel  is  better  than  the  Prophecies.  Although  the 
mere  textual  structure  of  the  sentence  does  not  necessarily 
imply  a  written  Gospel,  the  context  and  sense  of  the  testi- 
mony plainly  point  to  such.  Not  so  much  in  any  one  word 
as  in  the  whole  passage  does  it  become  evident,  that 
Ignatius  is  speaking  of  a  written  instrument  which  he  is  com- 


THE    CANON  OF  N.   T.   OF  PAPIAS.  303 

paring,  like  with  like,  to  the  Prophets,  and  extolling  above 
them.  This  sense  is  corroborated  by  a  testimony  in  his 
Epistle  to  those  of  Philadelphia,  Chapter  V. :  "  Let  us  turn  to 
the  Gospel,  as  to  Christ  corporally  present,  and  to  the  Apostles 
as  to  the  priesthood  of  the  Church.  Let  us  love  also  the 
Prophets,  because  they  announced  Christ."  The  testimony 
evidently  speaks  of  the  Gospels,  and  the  other  writings  of  the 
New  Law  which  perpetuated  Christ  and  his  Apostles  on  earth. 

In  his  practical  use  of  Scripture,  in  his" genuine  Epistles, 
Ignatius  assimilates  the  truths  of  Scripture,  and  then  adduces 
them  in  his  own  words,  so  that  exact  quotations  are  not  therein 
found,  but  many  places  evidence  that  he  drew  largely  from 
the  New  Testament  writings.  Such  allusions  are  very  frequent 
in  the  Apostolic  Fathers.  This  the  rationalists  themselves 
concede.^ 

We  may  also  adduce  here  the  testimony  of  Papjas,  who,  ac- 
cording to  Irenaeus,  was  a  disciple  of  St.  John,  and  a  companion 
of  Polycarp.  The  testimony  as  preserved  to  us  by  Eusebius  (Hist. 
Eccles.  III.  XXXIX.)  is  as  follows  :  '*  That  priest  (St.  John) 
was  wont  to  say  that  Mark,  the  interpreter  of  Peter,  wrote 
down  diligently  whatever  he  remembered,  but  he  followed 
not  the  order  of  the  Lord's  words  and  deeds.  For  he  had 
never  heard  the  Lord,  or  followed  him  ^  *  *  Wherefore, 
Mark  erred  in  nothing,  writing  certain  things  as  he  remem- 
bered them." 

*  Reuss  (Hist,  du  Canon  Strasb.  1863,  p.  33):  "Ala  verite  on  ne  de- 
couvre  pas  encore  dans  ces  epitres  (Patrum  apostolicorum)  des  citationes 
nominatives  k  de  rares  exceptiones  pr&s...et  surtout  les  textes  des  apotres  ne 
sont  nuUe  part  invoques  expressment  et  literalment  comme  des  autorites 
(Cfr.  tamen  Polyc.  ad  Philip.  13).  Mais  ils  sont  quelquefois  exploites  tacite- 
ment  de  facon  qu'il  est  impossible  de  s'y  tromper  ;  en  certains  endroits,  les 
exhortations  revetent  les  formules  employees  par  ces  illustres  predecesseurs, 
et  Ton  se  convainc  facilement  que  le»  ecrivains  de  cette  seconde  generation 
faisaient  dejd  une  etude  des  autres  de  la  premUre.  C'est  ainsi  que  la  lettre  de 
Clement  oflre  des  reminiscences  assez  precises  de  quelques  passages  des 
epitres  aux  Remains  et  aux  Corinthiens  et  surtout  de  celle  aux  Hebreux ; 
celles  d'Ignace,  plus  nombreuses  (quae  tamen  simul  sumtae  vix  priorem 
dementis  longitudine  aequant)  et  en  tout  cas  beaucoup  plus  recentes,  en 
present  d'autres  qui  nous  ram^nent  aux  epitres  aux  Corinthiens  et  aux  Galates 
ainsi  qu'fi,  I'^i^vangile  de  Jean  ;  enfln  la  toute  petite  epitre  de  Polycarpe  con- 
tient  de  frequentes  allusions  a  des  passages  apostoliques,  notamment  aux 
Actes,  S  la  premiere  epitre  de  Pierre,  S  celles  aux  Rom.,  aux  Gal.,  aux  lEphes., 
et  ^  la  Timothee.  Encore  une  fois,  cet  usage  est  purement  homiletique  ou 
rhetorique  ;  nulle  part  un  nom  d'apotre,  une  formule  de  citation  (?),  un  avis 
quelconque  n'avertit  le  lecteur  que  les  paroles,  que  nous  reconnaissons  im- 
mediatement  comme  des  elementes  d'emprunt,  aient  une  valeur  particuliere 
et  differente  de  celles  de  I'entourage)."    (Comely,  op.  cit.  pag.  160.) 


304        THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.   AT  CLOSE  OF  I.   CENTURY. 

Of  Matthew,  Papias  writes  thus :  "  Matthew,  he  said, 
wrote  the  discourses  (of  the  Lord)  in  the  Hebrew  tongue  ;  men 
translated  them  as  every  one  was  able."  The  Gospel  of  Mat- 
thew is  termed  the  \6yia  {KvpiuKh),  since  it  contains  more  of 
the  Lord's  discourses  than  any  other  Gospel.  Though  it  is 
impossible  to  fix  the  certain  date  of  Papias'  writing,  we  are 
sure  that  he  touches  the  Apostolic  age,  and  records  that  which 
he  received  from  those  of  the  Apostolic  age.  His  testimony 
is  conclusive  for  the  existence  in  the  first  century  of  the  writ- 
ten Gospels  of  Matthew  and  Mark.  Eusebius  also,  in  the 
same  place,  declares  that  "  the  same  Papias,  made  use  of  testi- 
monies taken  from  the  first  Epistle  of  St.  John  and  the  first  of 
Peter."  The  Gospel  of  Matthew  has  also  in  its  favor,  the  tes- 
timony of  Eusebius  concerning  St.  Pantaenus,  "who  moved 
by  divine  zeal,  and  fired  by  the  example  of  the  Apostles  *  *  * 
is  said  to  have  penetrated  even  to  the  Indies,  and,  to  have 
found  there  the  Gospel  of  Matthew,  which  had  preceded  him, 
and  was  held  by  certain  ones  who  had  embraced  Chistianity. 
It  is  said  that  Bartholomew,  one  of  the  twelve,  preached  to 
these,  and  left  them  the  Gospel  of  Matthew,  written  in  Hebrew." 

We  find,  therefore,  that  at  the  end  of  the  first  century  the 
Canon  of  the  four  Gospels  was  in  universal  acceptance  in  all 
the  Christian  communities.  In  the  first  quarter  of  the  second 
century  we  find  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  in  all  the  great 
Churches.  Certainly  Clement  of  Rome,  Ignatius  (martyr)  and 
Polycarp  had  a  collection  of  Pauline  Epistles,  and  supposed 
the  same  to  exist  with  those  to  whom  they  wrote.  The  whole 
fourteen  Epistles  may  not  have  been  equally  known,  but  Loisy 
(op.  cit.)  who  is  not  disposed  to  be  too  favorable  to  the  Cath- 
olic position,  admits  thirteen  in  the  collection  then  received. 

The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  are  used  by  Ignatius,  Polycarp, 
and  Clement  of  Rome.  The  Epistle  of  James,  the  First  Epistle 
of  Peter,  and  First  of  John,  have  clearest  testimonies.  St. 
Irenaeus  (Contra  Haereses  V.  30)  declares  that  those  who  saw 
John  face  to  face  bear  witness  to  the  Apocalypse.  He  evi- 
dently means  by  such  phrase,  Papias  and  Polycarp.  There  is 
no  clear  testimony  of  the  Apostolic  age  for  the  Epistle  of 
Philemon,  the  Second  Epistle  of  Peter,  the  Second  and  Third 
of  John,  and  the  Epistle  of  Jude.  It  would  not  be  just  to 
infer  from  this,  that  they  were  not  known  then.  But  little  of 
the  literary  product  of  that  age  has  come  down  to  us ;  and 
besides,  the  character  of  these  writings  was  less  useful 
for  the  scope  for  which  the  early  Fathers  employed  the 
Scriptures. 


THE    CANON  OF  N.   T.   OF  JUSTIN.  305 

Passing  from  the  Apostolic  Fathers  to  their  immediate 
successors,  the  testimonies  increase  in  number  and  clearness. 

St.  Justin  (ti63)  testifies  (Apologia  I.  66):  "For  the 
Apostles  in  their  Memorabilia  {aTro/jLvrjixovevfiaTo)  which  are 
called  Gospels,  declare  that  Jesus  thus  commanded  them  ; 
that  he  took  bread,  and,  having  given  thanks,  said  :  *  Do  this 
in  remembrance  of  me  ;  this  is  my  body ' ;  and  also  taking  the 
chalice,  and  giving  thanks,  he  said  :  '  This  is  my  blood.'  " 

Justin's  peculiar  term  for  the  Gospels  is,  nevertheless,  apt; 
for  they  wrote  down  the  principal  words  and  deeds  of  the 
Lord,  as  they  remembered  them,. 

In  paragraph  6^,  he  again  speaks  of  the  Gospels :  "  On  what 
is  called  the  day  of  the  sun,  all  the  dwellers  of  the  cities  and 
the  fields  gather  in  one  place,  and  the  Memorabilia  of  the 
Apostles,  or  the  writings  of  the  Prophets  are  read,  as  time 
permits." 

Again  in  his  dialogue  against  Tryphon,  103 :  "  For  in  the 
Memorabilia,  which  I  place  to  have  been  written  by  his 
Apostles  and  their  disciples,  it  is  stated  that  sweat  like  drops 
of  blood  flowed  from  him,  when  he  prayed  and  said  :  *  If  it  be 
possible,  let  this  chalice  pass.'  "  There  is  an  evident  allusion 
to  St.  Luke's  Gospel  here,  for  only  Luke  speaks  of  the  sweat 
like  drops  of  blood. 

Again  in  the  same  paragraph  we  find  :  "  Immediately  after 
Jesus  ascended  from  the  River  Jordan,  where  the  voice  came 
upon  him  :  '  Thou  art  my  son  ;  to-day  have  I  begotten  thee,' 
it  is  written  in  the  Memorabilia  of  the  Apostles,  that  Satan 
approached  him,  and  tempted  him,  saying:  'Adore  me.'  And 
Christ  answered  :  '  Begone  from  me,  Satan  ;  the  Lord  thy  God 
shalt  thou  adore,  and  him  only  shalt  thou  serve.'  " 

We  find  an  allusion  to  the  fourth  Gospel  in  paragraph  105 
of  the  Dialogue  :  "  I  have  before  demonstrated,  as  we  learn 
from  the  Memorabilia,  that  the  Only-begotten  of  the  Father 
of  the  universe  is  properly  the  WORD,  and  power  begotten  of 
him,  and  afterwards  born  a  man  of  the  Virgin."  Only  John 
calls  Christ  the  Word. 

St.  Justin  in  his  Dialogue  against  Tryphon  the  Jew,  81, 
has  a  clear  testimony  for  the  Apocalypse  :  "  And  in  addition 
to  these  things,  a  man  from  among  us,  John  by  name,  a 
disciple  of  the  Lord,  in  an  Apocalypse  made  known  to  him, 
prophesies  that  those  who  have  believed  in  Christ  will  dwell 
at  Jerusalem  for  a  thousand  years,  and  then  will  be  the  gen- 
eral, in  a  word,  the  eternal  resurrection,  and  the  future  judg- 
ment." 

T 


306  THE  CANON   OF  N.  T.   OF  CHURCH  OF  EDESSA. 

The  few  works  that  remain  of  Justin  are  filled  with  passages 
taken  from  the  Gospels,  without  acknowledgment  of  source. 

St.  Justin,  in  Apologia  pro  Christianis,  I.  63,  speaking  of 
Christ,  says:  "  He  is  called  an  angel  and  an  APOSTLE."  It  is 
only  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  HI.  i,  that  Christ  is  called 
an  Apostle. 

In  his  Treatise  against  Tryphon,  33,  he  draws  a  comparison 
between  Christ  and  Melchisedech,  clearly  revealing  knowledge 
of  Epistle  to  Hebrews,  V.  8-10.  Traces  also  are  found  in  his 
works  of  all  the  other  books  of  the  New  Testament,  except 
the  Epistle  of  St.  Jude,  the  Second  Epistle  of  St.  Peter,  and 
the  Second  and  Third  of  St.  John. 

One  of  the  disciples  of  St.  Justin  was  the  famous  Tatian. 
According  to  the  most  probable  critical  data,  Tatian  was  by 
origin  a  Syrian.  He  visited  Rome  with  Justin,  and  then  re- 
turned to  his  native  country  and  fixed  his  domicile  at  Edessa. 
He  composed  there  his  famous  Diatessaron,  or  harmony  of 
the  four  Gospels  in  Syriac.  This  work  was,  in  1888,  translated 
into  Latin  by  Cardinal  Ciasca,  from  the  Arabic  version  of 
Abul-Pharag.  The  Diatessaron  was  a  harmonized  account  of 
the  Gospel  data  taken  from  the  four  Gospels.  It  remained 
the  official  Gospel  of  the  Syrian  Church,  through  the  time  of 
St.  Ephrem,  even  to  the  fifth  century,  when  it  was  superseded 
by  the  individual  Gospels. 

It  is  certain,  therefore,  that  the  Church  of  Edessa,  in  the 
first  half  of  the  second  century,  possessed  the  written  Gospels 
in  the  form  of  the  Diatessaron.  It  is  not  easy  to  fix,  what 
other  books  entered  into  their  collection. 

In  the  Doctrina  Addai,  which  reflects  the  old  tradition  of 
the  Church  of  Edessa,  on  the  Canon  of  Scriptures,  the  follow- 
ing declaration  is  placed  in  the  mouth  of  the  dying  Addai  :* 
"  The  Law,  the  Prophets  and  the  Gospel,  which  you  read 
daily  to  the  people,  and  the  Epistles  of  Paul,  which  Simon 
Peter  sent  us  from  Rome,  and  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  which 
John,  the  son  of  Zebedee,  sent  us  from  Ephesus — these  are 

*The  name  Addai  seems  to  be  a  Syriac  approximation  to  the  name  of 
Thaddeus  the  Apostle.  The  Doctrina  Addai  is  the  apocryphal  acts  of  this 
Apostle.  This  work  was  published  in  the  Syriac  original  by  Cureton. 
(Ancient  Syriac  Documents,  London,  1864.)  It  has  more  recently  been 
studied  by  Lipsius  (2)ie  ebeffenifcfte  abgar— fage,  Brunswick,  1880)  and  the 
Abbfi  Tixeront  (Les  Origines  de  Vkglise  d'lldesse,  Paris,  1888). 

It  is  a  work  ranging  between  the  end  of  the  third  and  beginning  of  the 
fourth  century.  Its  source  is  a  legend  known  to  Eusebius,  and  extending 
back  to  the  first  half  of  the  third  century.  Though  the  work  is  apocryphal, 
it  is  founded  in  the  tradition  of  the  Edessene  Church  of  that  period. 


THE  CANON  OF  N.   T.   OF  MARCION.  307 

the  Scriptures  that  ye  should  read  in  the  Church  of  Christ, 
and  ye  should  read  naught  else."  (Doctrine  of  Addai,  ed. 
Phillips,  1876,  p.  46.) 

This  testimony  is  valuable  only  in  its  affirmative  sense.  It 
makes  known  that  in  the  Church  of  Edessa,  the  Gospels,  the 
Epistles  of  Paul,  and  the  Acts  had  been  canonized.  The 
omission  of  the  other  books  is  due  to  the  strange  genius  of 
Tatian,  which  moved  in  independent  lines.  The  Canon  of  the 
early  Church  of  Edessa,  was,  doubtless,  formed  by  him,  and  he 
excluded  those  books  which  his  caprice  found  less  acceptable. 

The  Epistle  to  Diognetus  speaks  of  the  Gospels  in  the 
plural  number  as  a  body  of  writings  existing  side  by  side  with 
the  Law  and  the  Prophets.*  "  The  reverence  of  the  Law  is 
chanted,  and  the  grace  of  the  Prophets  is  known,  and  the  faith 
of  the  Gospels  is  built  up,  and  the  teaching  {Kapd8o<n<;)  of  the 
Apostles  is  preserved,  and  the  grace  of  the  Church  exults." 

Melito  of  Sardis,  according  to  Eusebius(Hist.  Eccles,  IV.  26) 
wrote  a  commentary  on  the  Apocalypse  of  St.  John.  The 
work  has  not  been  preserved  for  us. 

Marcion  rejected  the  Old  Testament,  and  mutilated  the 
New.f  He  found  a  fundamental  repugnance  between  the  Law 
and  the  Gospel.  Since  the  New  Testament  endorses  in  many 
places  the  Old  Testament,  Marcion  expurgated  it.  Of  the 
Gospels,  he  took  only  that  of  Luke,  mutilated  to  suit  his 
scope.  Out  of  Paul's  Epistles,  he  constituted  the  Apostolic 
Book,  containing  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  the  two  Epistles 
to  the  Corinthians,  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  the  two  Epistles 
to  the  Thessalonians,  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  (called  by 
him  the  Epistle  to  those  of  Laodicea),  the  Epistle  to  the 
Colossians,  the  Epistle  to  the  Philippians,  and  that  to  Phile- 
mon. 

"  Et  super  haec,  id  quod  est  Evangelium  secundum  Lucam 
circumcidens,  et  omnia  quae  sunt  de  generatione  Domini  con- 
scripta  auferens,  et  de  doctrina  sermonum  Domini  multa  au- 

*The  Epistle  to  Diognetus  was  formerly  attributed  to  Justin  the  martyr. 
Many  critics  reject  the  authorship,  but  a  conservative  opinion  will  place  it  as 
early  as  170,  A.  D. 

fMarcion  was  born  in  Sinope,  in  Pontus.  His  father  was  bishop  of  that  city. 
Marcion,  being  cut  off  from  the  Church  for  having  offered  violence  to  a  virgin, 
came  to  Rome  between  the  years  140  and  165.  He  there  became  attached  to 
the  party  of  Cerdon,  the  heretic.  But  later  he  extended  the  system  by  new 
errors.  The  system  of  Marcion  has  this  in  common  with  the  Manichean 
heresy,  that  it  constitutes  two  principles,  the  one  good  and  the  other  evil, 
the  first  causes  of  everything.  According  to  Marcion,  the  flesh  was  the  crea- 
tion of  the  evil  principle,  and  therefore,  Christ  had  only  an  apparent  body. 


308     THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AND  THE  APOCRYPHA. 

ferens,  in  quibus  manifestissime  conditorem  hujus  universitatis 
suum  Patrem  confitens  Dominus  conscriptus  est ;  semetipsum 
esse  veraciorem  quam  sunt  hi  qui  Evangelium  tradiderunt 
Apostoli,  suasit  discipulis  suis ;  non  Evangelium,  sed  particu- 
1am  Evangelii  tradens  eis.  Similiter  autem  et  apostoli  Pauli 
Epistolas  abscidit,  auferens  quaecumque  manifeste  dicta  sunt 
ab  Apostolo  de  eo  Deo  qui  mundum  fecit,  quoniam  hie 
Pater  Domini  nostri  Jesu  Christi,  et  quaecumque  ex 
propheticis  memorans  Apostolus  docuit,  praenuntiantibus 
adventum  Domini."  (Tertullian,  Adv.  Marc.  IV.2.  (P.  L. 
2,  364). 

Marcion  did  not  question  the  authenticity  of  the  books 
which  he  rejected.  He  simply  placed  his  theological  system 
above  Holy  Writ,  and  selected  only  those  books  which  by  his 
mutilation  could  be  made  to  conform  to  his  placita.  Tertullian, 
Irenaeus,  and  others  of  that  age,  who  refuted  Marcion,  always 
fix  upon  him  the  charge  of  having  mutilated  the  Scriptures, 
which  of  old  time  had  been  received  by  the  Church.  This  is 
valuable  to  us  in  establishing  that  before  the  time  of  Marcion, 
the  written  deposit  of  the  New  Testament  included  many 
more  books  than  he  accepted  in  his  list. 

The  opponents  of  the  Canon  of  the  New  Testament  some- 
time allege,  that  those  who  received  and  used  the  books  of  the 
New  Testament,  never  regarded  them  as  divine  Scripture. 
This  is  sufficiently  disproven  by  the  data  already  adduced.  A 
certain  tendency  did  exist,  for  the  first  two  centuries,  to  per- 
petuate the  method  of  Christ  in  the  mode  of  speaking  of 
Scriptural  data.  Christ  speaks  of  the  Old  Testament  as  the 
Scriptures ;  of  his  Gospel,  as  the  living  reality.  Now,  the  early 
Christians,  while  extolling  the  data  of  the  New  Law  above 
that  of  the  Old,  often  reserved  the  name  of  Scripture  for  the 
books  of  the  Old  Testament,  considering  the  books  of  the  New 
Law  as  expressions  of  the  living  teachings,  which  lived  after 
Christ.  The  name  Scripture  seemed  to  throw  it  too  far  back 
into  antiquity.  Gradually,  however,  as  the  realization  of  the 
actual  presence  of  Christ  and  his  lieutenants  on  earth, 
passed  into  a  realization  of  a  past  historical  fact,  the  name  of 
Scripture  was  universally  given  to  the  books  of  the  New 
Covenant. 

Another  objection  is  made,  that  many  apocryphal  books,  at 
first,  enjoyed  equal  favor  with  the  books  of  the  New  Testament. 
This  also  is  found  to  be  false.  Certain  ones  which  contain  no 
falsity,  and  were  written  with  good  intent,  enjoyed  a  certain 
favor   in    private   reading,   but    never   in   the    official   usage. 


THE    CANON   OF   N.   T.   OF   HIPPOLYTE.  3  09 

There  was  lacking  to  them  the  endorsement  of  those  who  spoke 
in  Christ's  name.  They  never  received  the  approbation  of  an 
ApostoHc  Church.  Even  from  the  first,  the  line  of  demarcation 
between  them  and  the  Holy  Scriptures,  is  fixed  and  clear. 
Certainly  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit  aided  in  keeping  the 
scriptural  deposit  clear  of  the  vast  mass  of  Apocrypha,  which 
came  into  being  at  that  time.  The  causality  of  Divine  Provi- 
dence in  the  production  and  preservation  of  the  Scriptures,  is 
such  that  no  man  can  reason  rightly  of  them  without  taking 
account  thereof. 

In  the  authentic  works  of  St.  Hippolyte,  are  found  quota- 
tions from  the  New  Testament  books.  His  manner  of  quoting 
leaves  no  doubt  that  he  spoke  of  them  as  Holy  Scripture.  He 
quotes  Math.  IV.  15,  16,  in  the  formula,  "declarat  nobis 
Evangelium "  (Fragmenta  in  Genesim).  Ibidem,  he  says : 
"For  the  Lord,  in  keeping  the  precepts  of  the  Law,  did  not 
abrogate  the  Law  and  Prophets,  but  perfected  (them),  as  he 
says  in  the  Gospels!'  The  plural  number  proves  clearly  that  he 
spoke  of  several  written  Gospels. 

Again,  he  says :  "  And  Nephthalim  is  taken  as  a  type  of 
our  affairs,  as  the  Gospel  teaches :  '  Land  of  Zabulon  and  land 
of  Nephthalim,  the  way  of  the  sea  across  the  Jordan,'  and  that 
which  follows!'  He  could  only  call  attention  to  that  which 
follows  in  a  written  text.  Excepting  the  Epistle  to  Philemon, 
he  employs  all  Paul's  Epistles  as  Holy  Scripture.  In  loco 
citato,  we  find  the  following :  "  For  verily  the  only-begotten 
Word  of  God,  being  God  of  God,  emptied  himself  (iavrbv 
eKevwaev)  according  to  the  Scriptures  *  *  *  and  appeared 
in  the  form  of  a  slave,  becoming  obedient  to  God  the  Father, 
even  to  death ;  for  which  cause,  we  read  that  he  is  henceforth 
highly  exalted  *  *  *  and  hath  received  a  name  above  every 
other  name,  according  to  the  words  of  St.  Paul."  This  is  a 
paraphrase  on  the  Scripture  found  in  Paul's  Epistle  to  the 
Philippians,  II.  7-9. 

St.  Hippolyte  defended  the  Apocalypse  of  St.  John  in  a 
special  work  against  Caius.* 

He  had  a  certain  predilection  for  the  Apocalypse,  and  the 
fourth  Gospel.  In  his  treatise  against  Noetius,  VII.,  he  argues 
as  follows  :  "  We  who  have  the  mind  of  the  Father  believe 
thus ;  they  who  have  not,  deny  the  Son.  If  they  say,  as  Philip 
said,  questioning  concerning  the  Father :  *  Show  us  the  Father, 

*Catalogue  of  Ebed  Jesu,  c.  7  (ap.  Assemani,  Biblioth.  orient.  Ill,  1,  15) : 
"Sanctus  Hippolytus  martyr  et  episcopus  composuit. .  .capita  ad  versus  Caiura 
et  apologiam  pro  Apocalypsi  et  Evangelio  Joannis  Apostoli  et  Evangelistae." 


310  THE    CANON  OF  N.   T.   OF  THEOPHILUS. 

and  it  sufificeth  us ' ;  to  whom  the  Lord  replied  :  '  Have  I  been 
so  long  time  with  you,  and  hast  thou  not  known  me,  Philip  ? 
he  that  hath  seen  me,  hath  seen  the  Father.  Believest  thou 
not  that  I  am  in  the  Father,  and  the  Father  in  me?'  and  if 
they  dare  say  that  in  these  words  their  dogma  is  confirmed, 
from  the  Lord's  confession  that  he  is  in  the  Father,  let  them 
know  that  they  greatly  contradict  themselves,  for  the  Scrip- 
ture confutes  them  and  convicts  them." 

The  greatest  part  of  Hippolyte's  arguments  are  drawn  from 
the  New  Testament ;  and  in  the  IX.  Chap,  against  Noet,  he 
describes  his  sources :  "  Just  as  one  who  would  know  the 
wisdom  of  the  world,  must  study  the  doctrines  of  philosophers  ; 
thus  we,  who  would  have  the  religion  of  God,  can  learn  not 
elsewhere  than  in  the  Holy  Scriptures.  Let  us  know,  there- 
fore, what  the  Holy  Scriptures  proclaim,  and  let  us  study  what 
they  teach." 

Hippolyte  refuted  Noet  principally  from  the  Gospel  and 
Apocalypse  of  St.  John. 

St.  Theophilus,  who,  according  to  Jerome,  was  the  sixth 
bishop  of  Antioch,  and  who  governed  the  Church  of  Antioch 
about  the  year  i86,  has  a  clear  testimony  in  favor  of  the 
Gospels  and  Pauline  Epistles:  "Moreover,  concerning  the 
justice  which  the  Law  commands  the  statements  of  the 
Prophets  and  the  Gospels  are  found  consonant  since  they  all 
spoke  in  the  inspiration  of  the  same  Spirit  of  God.  *  *  *  * 
Regarding  chastity,  the  Holy  Scripture  teaches  us  not  only 
not  to  sin  in  deed,  but  also  not  in  thought  *  *  *  *  and 
the  voice  of  the  Gospels,  commands  more  earnestly  of  chastity : 
'Whosoever  looketh  on  a  woman  to  lust  after  her,  hath  com- 
mitted adultery  with  her  already  in  his  heart  (Math.  V.  28) ; 
and  whosoever  shall  marry  her  that  is  divorced,  committeth 
adultery,  and  whosoever  putteth  away  his  wife,  saving  for  the 
cause  of  fornication,  causeth  her  to  commit  adultery.'  "  (Ibid. 
32).     Ad  Autolycum  III.  13. 

Again  in  opere  citato,  14 :  "This  also  doth  the  Holy  Scripture 
enjoin,  that  we  be  subject  to  magistrates  and  powers,  and  pray 
for  them,  that  we  may  lead  a  quiet  and  peaceful  life  (I.  Tim. 
II.  2.).  And  it  teaches  to  render  all  things  to  all  persons: 
*  Honor  to  whom  honor;  fear  to  whom  fear;  tribute  to  whom 
tribute ;  and  to  owe  no  man  anything,  but  to  love  one 
another."'     (Rom.  XIII.  7-8.) 

In  Book  II.  ad  Autolycum  22,  he  canonizes  the  fourth 
Gospel :     *'  These  things  the   Holy  Scriptures  teach  us,  and 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  OF  MURATORI.        311 

whosoever  were  inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  among  whom  is 
John,  saying  thus  :  'In  the  beginning  was  the  Word,  and  the 
Word  was  with  God.'  " 

According  to  Eusebius,  (Hist.  Eccles.  IV.  24.)  Theophilus 
also  "  composed  a  treatise  against  the  heresy  of  Hermogenes, 
in  which  he  makes  use  of  testimony  from  the  Apocalypse  of 
John." 

We  come  now  to  examine  the  famous  document  commonly 
known  as  the  Canon  of  Muratori.* 

This  document  was  discovered  by  Muratori  in  the  Ambro- 
sian  Library,  and  published  by  him  in  the  Antiquitates  Italicae, 
in  1740.  The  document  is  mutilated  at  the  beginning  and 
end.  It  is  written  in  barbarous  Latin.  Bleek,  Wieseler, 
Reuss  and  others  maintain  that  it  was  originally  written  in 
Latin.  Hilgenfeld,  Volckmar,  Zahn,  Lightfoot,  Comely, 
Loisy,  and  Muratori  himself  consider  it  a  translation  from  the 
Greek.  Its  author  is  unknown.  Muratori  conjectured  that  it 
was  written  by  Caius,  a  priest  of  Rome,  disciple  of  St.  Iren- 
aeus ;  Simon  de  Magistris  believes  Papias  to  be  the  author  ; 
Bunsen  ascribes  it  to  Hegesippus ;  Lightfoot  believes  it  to  be 
the  work  of  Hippolyte. 

While  we  remain  in  uncertainty  as  to  its  author  and  original 
tongue,  we  may  not  doubt  that  the  document  is  a  product  of 
the  second  half  of  the  Second  Century.  This  makes  it  of  first 
importance  in  establishing  the  Canon  of  Scripture  of  the 
Church  of  Rome  in  that  age.  It  is  highly  probable  that  its 
original  language  was  Greek,  the  liturgical  tongue  of  Rome  of 
that  day. 

The  age  of  the  Codex  found  by  Muratori  is  not  more 
remote  than  the  eighth  century ;  and  the  barbarisms  seem  to 
have  originated  from  the  ignorance  and  negligence  of  the 
copyist. 

*Louis  Anthony  Muratori,  was  born  at  Vignola,  in  the  province  of  Modeua, 
on  the  21st  of  October,  1672-  He  was  highly  endowed  by  nature,  and  re- 
ceived a  liberal  education.  At  the  age  of  23.  he  was  called  to  Milan,  by 
Charles  Borromeo,  and  placed  over  the  Ambrosian  College,  and  the  vast 
Ambrosian  Library.  In  1700  the  Duke  of  Modena  recalled  him  as  his  subject, 
made  him  his  librarian,  and  placed  him  over  the  archives  of  his  dukedom. 
He  was  undoubtedly  the  greatest  archeologist  of  his  age.  His  friendship 
was  sought  by  the  most  celebrated  savants  of  Italy  and  France.  Academies 
vied  with  each  other  for  his  patronage.  But  Muratori,  with  that  deeper 
wisdom  which  accompanies  true  learning,  shrank  from  all  ostentation,  so 
coveted  by  petty  minds. 

His  erudition  was  vast  and  varied.  At  times,  his  judgments  are  defective, 
even  in  matters  of  faith.  He  died  in  1750.  His  published  works  fill  46  volumes 
in  folio  ;  34  in  4to  ;  13,  in  8vo,  and  several  in  12mo. 


312  THE   CANON   OF   N.   T.   OF   MURATORI. 

The  original  author  evidently  wished  to  draw  up  a  canon 
of  Scripture,  and  distinguish  the  genuine  from  the  apocryphal 
books.  We  reproduce  here  the  document  after  the  fac  simile 
published  by  Tregelles  at  Oxford,  in  1867.  It  is  not  our 
intention  to  enter  into  the  world  of  conjecture  which  has  been 
created  by  the  learned  interpreters  of  this  document.  It  suf- 
fices us  to  show  only  its  import  in  its  relation  to  the  New 
Testament  Canon. 

quibus  tamen  Interfuit  et  ita  posuit.* 

Tertio  [tertium]  Evangelii  librum  secundo  [secundum]  Lucanf 
Lucas  Iste  medicus  post  acensum  [ascensum]  XPI, 
cum  eo  [eum]  Paulus  quasi  ut  iuris  studiosum 
secundum  adsumsisset,  numeni  [nomine]  suo 
ex  opinione  concribset  [conscripsit] ;  dnm  tamen  nee  Ipse 
dvidit  [vidit]  in  carne,  et  ide  prout  asequi  [assequi]  potuit ; 
ita  et  ad  [ab]  nativitate  lohannis  incipet  [incipit]  dicere. 
Quarti  Evangeliorum  lohannis  ex  decipolis  [discipulis]:}: 
cohortantibus  condescipulis  et  eps  [episcopis]  suis 
dixit :  conieiunate  mihi  odie  [hodie]  triduo  [triduum],  et 
quid  cuique  fuerit  revelatum,  a.lterutrum 
nobis  enarremus.    Eadem  nocte  reve- 
latum andreae  ex  apostolis,  ut  recognis- 

*It  seems  to  me  vain  to  conjecture  what  was  contained  in  the  mutilated 
beginning.  It  is  certain  that  it  must  have  related  to  the  Gospels  of  Matthew 
and  Mark.  The  very  fact  that  the  Gospel  of  Luke  is  called  the  third,  leaves 
no  room  to  doubt  that  the  first  and  second,  which  must  have  preceded,  were 
the  Gospels  of  Matthew  and  Mark.  We  see  in  the  document  evidences  of  the 
transition  from  Jow  Latin  to  Italian  in  the  placing  of  "  tertio  "  for  "tertium," 
''  secundo"  for  "  secundum,"  etc. 


fNotwithstanding  all  the  barbarisms  of  the  next  seven  lines,  these  data 
result  clearly  from  them :  That  Luke  is  the  author  of  the  third  Gospel ;  that 
the  physician  Luke  wrote  it  after  the  ascension  of  Our  Lord  ;  that  Luke  was 
a  companion  and  pupil  (juris  studiosus)  of  St.  Paul ;  that  Luke  wrote  the 
Gospel  in  his  own  name,  though  from  Paul's  data  (ex  opinione) ;  that  Luke 
had  not  seen  the  Lord  in  the  flesh,  and  wrote  after  diligent  research  (prout 
assequi  potuit) ;  and  that  he  began  his  Gospel  with  the  Nativity  of  John  the 
Baptist.     This  is  the  exact  history  of  the  third  Gospel. 


:t:Zahn  is  of  the  opinion  that  the  legend  contained  in  the  lines  from  the 
tenth  to  fifteenth  inclusively,  comes  from  the  Acta  Apocrypha  of  St.  John. 
There  may  be  a  grain  of  truth  in  it,  as  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Eusebius,  and 
St.  Jerome  testify  that  John  wrote  his  Gospel  at  the  request  of  the  bishops  of 
Asia.  John  certainly  received  by  direct  revelation  the  doctrine  of  the  eternal 
generation  of  the  Word.  But  the  legend  was  the  author's  explanation  of  a 
fact,  and  the  fact  was  that  the  Gospel  of  St.  John  was  in  the  deposit  of 
the  Church  of  Rome,  at  the  time  of  his  writing.  Thus  we  have  a  clear  testi- 
mony for  the  four  GJospels. 


THE  CANON   OF  N.   T.   OF   MURATORI.  313 

centibus  [recognoscentibus]  cuntis  [cunctis]  lohannis  [loannes] 

suo  nomine 
cunta  [cuncta]  discribret  [describeret]  et  ideo  licit  [licet]  varia"^ 
sinculis  [singulis]  evangeliorum  libris  principia 
doceantur,  nihil  tamen  differt  creden- 
tium  fidei,  cum  uno  ac  principali  spu  [Spiritu]  de-f 
clarata  sint  in  omnibus  omnia,  de  nativi- 
tate,  de  passione,  de  resurrectione, 
de  conversatione  cum  decipulis  [discipulis]  suis, 
ac  de  gemino  eius  advento  [adventu], 
primo  in  humilitate  dispectus  [despectus],  quod  fo- 
tu  [fuit],  secundum  potestate  regali  pre- 
clarum  quod  foturum  [futurum]  est.    Quid  ergo;}: 
mirum,  si  Johannes  tarn  constanter 
sincula  [singula]  etia  in  epistulis  suis  proferat 
dicens  in  semeipsu  [semetipsum]  :  Quae  vidimus  oculis 
nostris  et  auribus  audivimus  et  manus 
nostrae  palpaverunt,  haec  scripsimus  vobis  ; 
sic  enim  non  solum  visurem  [visorem],  sed  et  auditorem, 
sed  et  scriptore  omnium  mirabiliu  dni  [Domini]  per  ordi- 
nem  profetetur  [profitetur].     Acta  aute  omniu  apostolorum§ 
sub  uno  libro  scribta  [scripta]  sunt,  Lucas  obtime  theofi- 

*From  the  sixteenth  to  the  twenty -sixth  line  inclusively,  the  author  ex- 
plains that  although  every  Evangelist  has  a  different  point  of  departure  (varia 
principia)  they  all  are  moved  by  the  same  grand  motive,  and  all  conspire  to 
build  up  the  fulness  of  the  message.  Every  one  has  his  own  plan,  and  some- 
thing proper  to  himself,  but  one  completes  the  other,  and  one  Gospel  exists 
in  four  books,  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 


fThe  designation  of  the  Holy  Ghost  as  "principalis "  is  also  used  in  the 
LI.  (Vulg.  L.)  Psalm. 

^The  passage  included  between  the  last  words  of  the  26th  line  and  the  first 
half  of  the  34th  establishes  that  John  wrote  more  than  one  Epistle  (in 
Epistolis,  plural  number) :  that  he  wrote  from  personal  experience  (in  seme- 
tipsum) :  and  that  the  first  Epistle  of  John  is  one  of  the  Epistolae,  for  its  open- 
ing sentence  is  literally  quoted.  Later  data  of  the  document  leave  no  doubt 
that  its  author  included  the  three  Epistles  of  John  in  his  Canon. 


§The  passage  from  the  second  half  of  the  thirty-fourth  line  down  to  the 
close  of  the  period  in  the  thirty-ninth,  clearly  establishes  the  Canonicity  of 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  It  seems  to  be  the  mind  of  the  author,  that  except- 
ing the  martyrdom  of  Peter  (Semota  passione  Petri)  Luke  wrote  down  the 
acts  which  he  had  personally  witnessed.  The  closing  words  of  the  period  are 
most  difficult  and  have  received  many  interpretations.  Cornely  believes  that 
the  author  speaks  of  the  journey  of  Paul  from  Eome  to  Spain,  which,  like  the 
martyrdom  of  Peter,  has  been  omitted  by  him. 

Cornely  corrects  the  reading  as  follows  :  Sed  et  profectionem  Pauli  ab 
urbe,  Spaniam  proficiscentis."    Thus  it  would  become  a  testimony  of  the 


314  THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.   OF  MURATORI. 

le  comprindit  [comprehendit],  quia  sub  praesentia  eius  singula 

gerebantur,  sicut  et  semote  passione  Petri 

evidenter  declarat,  sed  et  profectionem  pauli  ad  ur- 

bes  [urbem]  ad  spania  proficescentis.    Epistulae  autem^ 

second  century  of  the  voyage  of  Paul  to  Spain.  I  can  not  receive  this  con- 
jecture of  Cornely.  The  writer  of  Muratori's  Canon,  is  there  describing  what 
Luke  wrote.  Now,  nowhere  does  Luke  give  us  the  departure  of  Paul 
from  Rome  for  Spain.  I  would  venture  the  correction  :  Sed  et  profectionenii 
Pauli  ad  urbem  (Romam)  ad  Spaniam  proficiscentis.  The  voyage  to  Rome  of 
Paul,  who  had  set  out  for  Spain.  Now,  Luke  did  write  the  account  of  Paul's 
journey  to  Rome,  who  had  in  a  general  way  set  out  for  Spain.  The  authors 
who  have  sustained  Paul's  voyage  seem  to  have  been  moved  by  Paul's  own 
words,  Rom.  XV.  28.:  "When,  therefore,  I  have  performed  this,  and  have 
sealed  to  them  this  fruit,  I  will  come  by  you  into  Spain",  manifesting  such  a 
design  which  they  assume  as  prophetic.  Such  position  seems  to  me  vain  and 
unfounded.  These  words  express  simply  a  human  wish  and  design,  which 
was  not  subsequently  realized.  There  is  no  trace  in  the  traditions  of  Spain 
of  Paul's  visit,  and  I  am  forced  to  hold  the  opposite  opinion.  Cornely  and 
others  make  Paul  go  back  from  Spain  to  the  Orient  to  visit  his  churches, 
before  his  martyrdom  at  Rome,  and  thus  contravene  a  clear  prophecy.  Acts 
XX.  25  :  "  Et  nunc  ecce  ego  scio  quia  amplius  non  videbitis  faciem  meam, 
vos  omnes  per  quos  transivi  praedicans  Regnum  Dei. "  Those  who  defend 
Paul's  voyage  to  Spain,  and  thence  to  the  Orient,  in  order  to  give  effect  to 
words  clearly  indicative  of  a  human  design,  subject  to  the  vicissitudes  of 
time,  destroy  the  sense  of  words  manifestly  spoken  in  the  spirit  of  prophecy. 
I  believe  that  Paul  never  left  Rome  after  his  entrance  thither,  till  he  left  it  for 
Heaven. 


*The  passage  from  the  close  of  the  thirty-ninth  line  down  to  the  close  of 
the  period  in  the  sixty-third,  establishes  the  Canonicity  of  all  the  Epistles  of 
Paul  except  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  According  to  the  author's  method 
of  computation,  Paul,  after  the  manner  of  John  in  the  Apocalypse  wrote 
letters  to  seven  churches,  in  this  order:  Corinthians,  Ephesians,  Philippians, 
Colossians,  Gfalatians,  Thessalonians,  and  Romans.  Two  of  these  are  repeated: 
that  to  the  Corinthians,  and  that  to  the  Thessalonians.  From  the  fifty -fourth 
line  to  the  middle  of  the  fifty -ninth,  the  construction  is  very  involved,  and  the 
text,  perhaps,  corrupt ;  but  the  sense  is  evidently  that,  though  Paul  and  John 
wrote  to  seven  different  individual  churches,  the  Catholic  Church  was  one 
and  the  same  throughout  the  whole  world.  The  thought  is  too  plain  to  need 
our  commentary.  In  terming  John  the  predecessor  of  Paul,  the  author 
refers  to  the  date  of  John's  calling  to  the  Apostolate,  not  to  the  date  of  the 
writing  of  the  Apocalypse.  The  list  of  Paul's  Epistles  closes  with  the  Epistle 
to  Philemon,  that  to  Titus,  and  the  two  to  Timothy,  whose  pastoral  scope 
(in  ordinationem  ecclesiasticae  disciplinae)  is  clearly  signified.  This  is  the  first 
clear  testimony  that  we  have  for  the  Epistle  to  Philemon.  It  is  not  strange  that 
the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  finds  no  place  therein.  St.  Clement  of  Rome  had 
used  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  as  Holy  Scripture.  But  after  the  rise  of  the 
Novatian  heresy,  which  denied  forgiveness  to  certain  sins,  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  which  seemed  to  favor  that  heresy,  was  omitted  in  the  public  use 
of  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  was  rarely  employed  by  any  writer  during  the 
second  and  third  century.  It  was  not  rejected,  but  simply  passed  over  in  a 
sort  of  religious  silence. 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  OF  MURATORI.        316 

PauH,  quae,  a  quo  loco,  vel  qua  ex  causa  directe  [directae] 

sint,  volentatibus  [volentibus]  intelligere  ipse^[ipsae]  declarant. 

primu  omnium  corintheis  scysmae  [schisma]  haeresis  in- 

terdicens,  deinceps  B  callatis  [Galatis]  circumcisione, 

Romanis  autem  ornidine  [ordinem]  scripturarum  sed  et 

principium  earum  esse  XPM  intimans, 

prolexius  [proHxius]  scripsit,  de  quibus  sincoHs  [singulis]  neces- 

se  est  ad  [a]  nobis  desputari.     Cum  ipse  beatus 

apostolus  Paulus  sequens  prodecessoris  [praedecessoris]  sui 

lohannisordinenonnisi  comenati  [nominatim]  semptae  [septem] 

eccleses  [ecclesiis]  scribat,  ordine  tali :  a  [ad]  corenthios 

prima ;  ad  efesios  seconda,  ad  philippinses  ter- 

tia,  ad  colosensis  quarta,  ad  calatas  [Galatas]  quin- 

ta,  ad  tensaolenecinsis  [Thessalonicenses]  sexta,  ad  romanos 

septima,  verum  corintheis  et  thessaolecen- 

sibus,  licet  pro  cerrebtione  [correptione]  iteretur,  una 

tamen  per  omnem  orbem  terrae  ecclesia 

deffusa  [diffusa]  esse  denoscitur   [dignoscitur] ;    Et  lohannis 

[loannes]  eni 
In  apocalebsy  [Apocalypsi]  licet  septe  eccleseis  scribat, 
tamen  omnibus  dicit.    Veru  ad  filemonem  una ; 
et  ad  titu  una,  et  ad  tymotheu  duas  [duae]  pro  affec- 
to  et  dilectione,  in  honore  [honorem]  tamen  ecclesiae  ca- 
tholice  [catholicae],  in  ordinationem  ecclesiastice  [ecclesiasticae] 
descepline  [disciplinae]  scificate  [sanctificatae]  sunt.     Fertur 

etiam  ad* 
Laudecenses  [Laodicenses],  alia  ad  alexandrinos  Pauli  no- 
mine fincte  [fictae]  ad  heresem  Marcionis,  et  alia  plu- 
ra,  quae  in  catholicam  ecclesiam  recepi  [recipi]  non 
potest :  fel  enim  cum  melle  misceri  non  con- 
cruit  [congruit].    Epistola  sane  lude  [ludae]  et  superscriptio 

[suprascripti]f 

*In  the  period  extending  from  sixty -third  to  sixty-eighth  line,  the  author 
rejects  the  supposititious  letters  to  the  Laodiceans,  and  to  the  Alexandrians. 
In  the  Apocryphal  letter  to  the  Laodiceans,  there  is  nothing  favorable  to 
Marcionism,  hence,  we  believe  that  he  spoke  of  that  heresy  only  in  relation 
to  the  lost  letter  to  the  Alexandrians.  Some  have  without  reason,  believed 
that  by  the  letter  to  the  Alexandrians,  Paul  meant  the  Epistle  to  Hebrews. 
This  is  plainly  unfounded,  as  Hebrews  was  never  known  in  antiquity  by  that 
name,  and  a  catalogue  of  the  Church  of  Rome  could  not  assign  it  such  a  place. 


fin  the  sixty -eighth  line  the  Epistle  of  St.  Jude  is  canonized.  The  sense 
of  statement  concerning  St.  John  is  obscure.  We  advance  a  probable  explana- 
tion of  it.  The  author  may  have  considered  the  preceding  notice  of  lines 
26-34  sufficient  for  first  Epistle,  and,  therefore,  here  receive  the  two  remain- 
ing  ones  among  the  Catholic  Epistles  (in  Catholica).     This  conjecture  is  more 


316  THE   CANON   OF   N.   T.    OF   MURATORI. 

lohannis  duas  [duae]  in  catholica  habentur.     Et  sapi- 
entia  ab  amicis  Salomonis  in  honore  ipsius 
scripta.     Apocalapse  [apocalypsim  vel  apocalypses]  etiam  lo- 
hannis et  Pe-* 
tri  tantum  recipimus,  quam  quidam  ex  nos- 
tris  legi  in  ecclesia  nolunt.     Pastorem  verof 
nuperrim  et  [nuperrime]  temporibus  nostris  In  urbe 
roma  herma  conscripsit,  sedente  [in]  cathe- 

probable  since  the  fate  of  the  11.  and  III.  Epistles  of  John  was  always  the  same 
Whoever  received  one  received  the  other.  It  seems  to  have  been  the  usage  of 
those  times  to  speak  of  the  Second  and  Third  Epistle  of  St.  John  apart  from 
the  first,  since  John's  authorship  of  them  was  not  by  all  acknowledged. 
Hence  the  author  follows  the  usage  of  his  time  in  classing  them  by  themselves, 
while  he  at  the  same  time  maintains  their  authenticity .  Another  conjecture 
endorsed,  by  many  is  that,  the  author  is  of  the  opinion  mentioned  by  Jerome, 
"  that  the  Second  and  Third  Epistles  are  not  of  John  the  Evangelist,  but  of 
another  John,  a  priest,  whose  sepulchre  is  shown  at  Ephesus."  This  seems 
to  me  erroneous,  from  the  suprascripti  of  the  document,  evidently  referring 
these  Epistles  to  the  Evangelist.  The  advocates  of  this  second  opinion  change 
the  "  et"  preceding  "Sapientia"  to  "ut  ",  and  believe  the  sense  to  be  that 
the  author  likens  these  two  Epistles  to  the  Book  of  Wisdom,inasmuch  as  they 
bear  John's  name,  though  not  written  by  him.  This  seems  to  me  gratuitous 
and  far-fetched.  Loisy  rightly  rejects  it,  and  maintains  that  the  presence  of 
Wisdom  here  is  due  to  its  late  origin,  so  that  by  some  it  was  considered  to 
belong  more  properly  to  the  New  than  to  the  Old  Testament. 


*The  period  comprised  between  the  seventy -first  and  seventy -third  line 
contains  a  clear  approbation  of  the  Apocalypse  of  St.  John,  but  the  rest  of 
its  import  is  obscure.  The  most  obvious  sense  is  that  with  the  Apocalypse 
of  John,  which  all  received,  was  an  Apocalypse  of  Peter  to  which  the  author 
was  favorably  inclined,  although  it  was  controverted  in  the  Church  of  Rome. 
Others  believe  the  text  to  be  corrupt,  and  that  the  genuine  text  contained 
mention  of  the  Epistles  of  St.  Peter.  Zahn  restores  the  text  thus  :  "  Apoca- 
lypsin  etiam  Johannis  et  Petri  unam  tantum  recipimus  epistolam ;  fertur 
etiam  altera  quam  quidem  ex  nostris  legi  in  Ecclesia  vol unt.',  The  conjec- 
ture is  ingenious,  but  must  remain  in  the  realm  of  conjecture.  I  am  more 
inclined  to  hold  with  Comely,  that  the  author  spoke  of  the  Epistles  of  Peter 
in  the  mutilated  beginning,  where  he  treated  of  Mark's  Gospel.  In  its  present 
state,  the  document  can  not  be  considered  a  proof  for  the  existence  of  St. 
Peter's  Epistles,  neither  is  their  omission  from  the  mutilated  exemplar  an 
argument  against  them.     We  must  seek  other  data  for  their  canonicity. 


f  Pastor  receives  its  true  place,  a  pious  book,  read  in  the  churches,  but 
not  considered  Holy  Scripture.  There  is  also  in  these  lines  an  indication  of 
the  date  of  the  document.  He  says  Pastor  was  written  recently,  in  our 
times,  by  Hermas.  while  his  brother  Pius  occupied  the  episcopal  chair.  Now, 
St.  Pius  reigned  from  142  to  151  or  156.  To  justify  the  author's  expression, 
it  could  not  have  been  long  after  this  epoch  that  the  document  was  written; 
hence.  Comely  rightly  infers  that  it  should  not  be  placed  later  than  the  year 
170.  The  close  of  the  document  is  obscure  ;  but,  since  it  bears  no  relation  to 
the  Canon  of  Scripture,  we  pass  it  over  in  silence. 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  OF  MURATORI.        317 

tra  [cathedra]  urbis  romae  ecclesiae  Pio  eps,  frater  [episcopo, 

fratre] 
eius ;  et  ideo  legi  eum  quidem  Oportet,  se  pu- 
plicare  [publicare]  vero  in  eclesia  populo  Neque  inter 
profetas  [prophetarum]  completum  numero  [numerum]  neque 

Inter 
apostolos  In  fine  temporum  potest. 
Arsinoi  autem  seu  valentini,  vel  miltiadis 
nihil  In  totum  recipemus  [recipimus].    Qui  etiam  novu 
psalmorum  librum  marcioni  conscripse- 
runt  una  cum  basilide  assianum  catafry- 
cum  constitutorem. 

The  Epistle  of  St.  James  finds  no  place  in  the  document. 
That  Epistle  had  been  used  as  divine  Scripture  by  the  author 
of  Pastor,  but  doubts  remained  in  some  minds  concerning  it. 
Thus,  Eusebius  (Hist.  Eccles.  II.  23)  speaks  concerning  it : 

"  These  accounts  are  given  respecting  James,  who  is  said 
to  have  written  the  first  of  the  Epistles  general,  (catholic);  but 
it  is  to  be  observed  that  it  is  considered  spurious.  Not  many 
indeed  of  the  ancients  have  mentioned  it,  and  not  even  that 
called  the  Epistle  of  Jude,  which  is  also  one  of  the  seven  called 
catholic  Epistles.  Nevertheless  we  know,  that  these,  with  the 
rest,  are  publicly  used  in  most  of  the  churches." 

Funk  (Patres  Apost.)  found  eight  references  to  St.  James' 
Epistle  in  the  I.  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  of  Clement  of  Rome. 
He  found  five  references  in  the  II.  Cor.,  by  some  attributed  to 
the  same  author;  and  six  references  in  Clement's  Epistles  to 
Virgins.  References  are  also  found  in  Justin  and  Irenaeus. 
It  is  not  clear  whether  certain  passages  in  the  works  of  Clement 
of  Alexandria  were  taken  from  James'  Epistle  or  from  the  Gos- 
pels. Origen  is  the  first  among  the  Fathers  who  quoted  the  work 
as  Holy  Scripture  under  the  name  of  James  the  Apostle. 

One  of  the  strongest  proofs  of  its  early  approbation  by  the 
Church  is  its  presence,  under  its  proper  name,  in  the  Peschito, 
which  dates  from  Apostolic  times. 

We  here  compare  two  passages  from  the  Pastor  of  Hermas 
with  the  Epistle  of  St.  James,  having  in  mind  to  prove  that 
he  drew  material  from  the  same  Epistle. 

St.  Jas.  V.  4.  Pastor,  Lib.  I.  Vis.  III.  9. 

"  Ecce,    merces    operariorum,  "  Videte  ergo  vos,  qui  gloria- 

qui  messuerunt  regiones  vestras,  mini  in  divitiis,  ne  forte  ingemis- 

quae  fraudata  est   a  vobis,  cla-  cant  ii  qui  agent,  et  gemitus  eo- 

mat ;  et  clamor  eorum  in  auras  rum  ascendat  ad  Dominum  — ." 
Domini  Sabaoth  introivit." 


318        THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  OF  IRENAEUS. 

Jas.  IV.  7.  Pastor,  Lib.  II.  Mand.  XII.  5. 

"  Subditi  ergo  estote  Deo  :  re-         "  —  Potest  autem  diabolus  luc- 

sistite  autem  diabolo,  et  fugiet  a     tari,  sed  vincere  non  potest.      Si 

vobis."  enim  rest's  ft  it's  illi^  fugiet  a  vobis 

confusus." 

Toward  the  close,  therefore,  of  the  second  century  the 
Canon  of  the  New  Testament  in  the  Church  of  Rome  con- 
tained all  the  books  of  the  Catholic  Canon,  excepting  the 
Epistle  of  St.  James,  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  and  probably 
the  Second  Epistle  of  St.  Peter. 

The  Canon  of  the  Church  of  Gaul  of  the  same  age  is  sought 
in  the  works  of  Irenaeus. 

A  splendid  testimony  for  the  four  Gospels  is  found  in  the 
Third  Book  of  his  Treatise  against  Heresy,  XI.  7-8:  "So  great 
is  the  certitude  of  the  Gospels  that  the  heretics  themselves 
render  testimony  to  them,  and  every  heretic  that  comes  forth 
strives  to  prove  his  doctrine  from  them.  For  the  Ebionites, 
who  use  only  the  Gospel  of  Matthew,  are  confuted  by  it,  that 
their  presumption  concerning  the  Lord  is  not  well  founded. 
Marcion,  who  mutilates  St.  Luke,  by  that  which  he  retains  of 
it  is  shown  to  be  a  blasphemer  against  the  Lord.  Those  who 
separate  Jesus  from  Christ,  and  who,  selecting  the  Gospel  of 
Mark,  say  that  Christ  remained  impassible,  and  that  Jesus 
suffered,  if  they  read  it  with  the  love  of  truth  can  be  corrected 
of  their  error.  The  Valentinians,  who  exclusively  use  the 
Gospel  of  John  for  the  ostentation  of  their  unions,  are  by  it 
shown  to  be  false  in  every  thing,  as  we  have  shown  in  the  first 
book.  Since,  therefore,  our  opponents  render  testimony  for  us, 
and  use  these  (Gospels),  our  demonstration  regarding  them  is 
shown  to  be  true  and  firm.  For  the  Church  receives  neither 
more  in  number  nor  fewer  in  number  than  these  Gospels. 
For  of  the  world  in  which  we  live,  there  are  four  great  regions  ; 
and  there  are  four  principal  winds ;  and  the  Church  is  spread 
over  the  whole  earth  ;  and  the  pillar  and  ground  of  the  Church 
(I.  Tim.  III.  15)  is  the  Gospel,  and  the  spirit  of  life ;  therefore 
it  follows  that  the  Church  has  four  columns  blowing  forth  in 
all  directions  incorruption,  and  vivifying  men.  From  which  it 
is  manifest  that  the  divine  Architect  of  all  things,  the  Word, 
who  is  borne  upon  the  Cherubim,  and  rules  all  things,  who  was 
made  manifest  to  men,  gave  us  the  fourfold  Gospel,  which  is 
actuated  by  one  Spirit."  Continuing,  he  applies  the  vision  of 
Ezechiel  to  the  four  Evangelists,  which  interpretation  has 
continued  in  the  Church  since  that  time.  The  conclusion  of 
Irenaeus  is  better  than  his  reasoning.     His  mysticism  avails 


THE  CANON  OF  N.   T.   OF  IRENAEUS.  319 

naught,  but  his  conclusion  is  independent  of  it.  The  conclu- 
sion  was  the  faith  of  the  Church  of  his  time,  which  he  strove 
to  illustrate.  We  could  add  nothing  to  this  testimony  by- 
adducing  the  numberless  quotations  of  the  Gospels  in  the 
works  of  Irenaeus.  It  is  sufficient  in  itself  to  establish  the 
status  of  the  Gospels  in  the  Church  of  Gaul  of  the  second 
century.  Irenaeus  was  a  disciple  of  the  disciples  of  St.  John. 
The  voice  of  Apostolic  times  is  perpetuated  by  them  to  him. 
He  speaks  in  the  tone  of  a  man  who  was  sure  of  his  point, 
knowing  that  he  had  back  of  him  the  faith  of  the  Catholic 
Church.  The  Church  from  the  Apostolic  times  received  four 
Gospels,  and  only  four.  Irenaeus  wrote,  in  the  twelfth, 
thirteenth,  and  fourteenth  chapters  of  this  same  third  book,  a 
commentary  on  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  In  the  beginning 
of  the  fourteenth  chapter,  he  vindicates  their  authorship  to  St. 
Luke. 

No  mention  is  found  in  Irenaeus  of  the  Epistle  to  Phile- 
mon, but  this  fact  is  not  strange,  considering  that  the  nature 
of  the  book  did  not  bring  it  within  the  scope  of  his  writing. 
Eusebius  testifies  (Hist.  Eccles.  V.  26)  that  Irenaeus,  in  a  book 
of  various  disputes,  quoted  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  In 
Lib.  II.  contra  Haer.  XXX.  9,  he  uses  the  phrase :  "  Deus 
omnia  fecit  verbo  virtutis  suae'';  the  form  of  expression,  so 
eminently  Pauline,  is  evidently  taken  from  Hebrews  I.  3. 

All  the  other  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  are  used  with  equal  fre- 
quency with  the  Gospels.  All  the  works  of  Irenaeus  are  rich 
in  quotations  from  them.  Paul's  pastoral  Epistles  are  received 
with  equal  favor  with  the  others.  He  begins  his  great  work 
against  the  heresies  with  a  quotation  from  Timothy,  I.  4.  In 
Lib.  II.  XIV.  I,  he  says:  "  And  Paul  himself  has  manifested 
in  his  Epistles,  saying :  Demas  has  left  me,  and  gone  to  Thes- 
salonica ;  Crescens,  into  Galatia  ;  only  Luke  is  with  me."  (II. 
Tim.  IV.  lo-ii.)  Inop.  cit.  Lib.  IV.  XVI.  5,  he  quotes  the  first 
Epistle  of  St.  Peter:  "And  for  this  cause,  Peter  says:  That  we 
have  not  liberty  for  a  cloak  of  maliciousness."  I.  Pet. 
II.  16. 

In  op.  cit.  Lib.  V.  XXIII.  2,  he  has  the  following  allusion 
to  the  Second  Epistle  of  St.  Peter:  "Certain  ones  place  the 
death  of  Adam  in  the  thousandth  year,  for  a  day  with  the 
Lord  is  as  a  thousand  years''  Loisy  believes  that  Irenaeus 
here  draws  from  Psalm  XC.  (Vulg.  LXXXIX.) ;  but  the 
phraseology  and  the  context  plainly  point  to  II.  Peter,  III.  8  : 
"But,  beloved,  be  not  ignorant  of  one  thing  that  one  day  is  with 
the  Lord  as  a  thousand  years.'' 


320         THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  OF  IRENAEUS. 

Again  in  op.  cit.  Lib.  IV.  XIII.  and  XVI.  Irenaeus  speaks 
of  Abraham  as  the  friend  of  God.  In  the  latter  place,  he 
quotes  the  passage :  "  Credidit  Deo,  et  reputatum  est  illi  ad 
justitiam,  et  amicus  Dei  vocatus  est."  Now,  although  the 
first  part  of  the  expression  is  found  in  Genesis,  XV.  6,  and  in 
the  Epistles  of  Paul,  the  whole  expression  is  found  only  in 
James  II.  23. 

In  Lib.  V,  I.  I,  Irenaeus  calls  the  Christians,  "the  first 
fruits  of  his  (God's)  creatures,"  which  peculiar  expression  is 
only  found  in  James  I.  18. 

No  mention  is  found  in  the  works  of  Irenaeus  of  the 
Epistle  of  Jude.  But  I  believe  with  Loisy  that  it  was  in  the 
collection  of  the  Church  of  Gaul  at  the  time.  The  Canon 
of  Muratori  shows  us  that  it  had  a  secure  place  in  the  Canon 
of  Rome,  and  the  Church  of  Gaul  was  in  strict  conformity 
with  Rome. 

St.  Irenaeus  directly  quotes  from  the  First  and  Second 
Epistles  of  St.  John, 

In  op.  cit.  Lib.  III.  5,  he  writes:  "Wherefore,  also  in  his 
Epistle,  he  (John)  has  testified  to  us:  "Little  children,  it  is 
the  last  hour :  and  as  you  have  heard  that  antichrist  cometh : 
even  now  there  are  many  antichrists  :  whereby  we  know  that 
it  is  the  last  hour."     I.  Jo.  II.  18. 

A  little  farther  on  in  the  same  work  in  Paragraph  8,  he  has 
this  testimony:  "And  these  are  the  ones  whom  the  Lord 
bade  us  avoid,  and  also  his  disciple  John  in  the  aforesaid 
Epistle,  hdide  us  fly  from  them  saying:  '  Many  seducers  are 
entered  into  the  world,  who  confess  not  that  Jesus  Christ,  is  come 
in  the  flesh.  This  is  a  seducer  and  is  antichrist.  Look  to  your- 
selves, that  ye  lose  not  those  things  which  ye  have  wrought.' 
And  again  in  his  Epistle  he  says :  "  Dearly  beloved,  believe 
not  every  spirit,  but  try  the  spirits  whether  they  be  of  God : 
because  many  false  prophets  are  gone  out  into  the  world. 

By  this  is  the  spirit  of  God  known :  every  spirit  which 
confesseth  Jesus  Christ  to  have  come  in  the  flesh,  is  of  God  : 

And  every  spirit,  that  dissolveth  Jesus,  is  not  of  God,  and 
this  is  antichrist,  of  whom  you  have  heard  that  he  cometh,  and 
he  is  now  already  in  the  world." 

The  first  quotation  is  literally  quoted  from  John's  Second 
Epistle.  Irenaeus  was  familiar  with  them  both,  and,  quoting 
from  memory,  it  is  due  to  a  fault  of  memory  that  he  refers  the 
passage  to  the  first  Epistle. 

In  op.  cit.  Lib.  LXVI.  3,  he  again  quotes  the  second 
Epistle:    "  For  John,  the  disciple  of  the  Lord,  places  damna- 


THE   CANON   OF  N.   T.   OF   TERTULLIAN.  321 

tion  upon  them,  not  allowing  us  to  bid  them  God  speed :  'For 
he  that  biddeth  him  God  speed,  is  partaker  of  his  evil  deeds.'  " 
II.  Jo.  I.  II. 

These  data  leave  no  doubt  that  Irenaeus  received  and  em- 
ployed as  Holy  Scripture,  at  least  the  First  and  Second  Epistles 
of  John.  But  since  the  history  of  the  First  and  Second  has 
always  been  the  same,  it  is  highly  probable  that  he  received 
also  the  Third,  though  he  had  no  occasion  to  quote  it, 

Irenaeus  made  great  use  of  the  Apocalypse.  In  op.  cit. 
Lib.  IV.  XXVI.  I,  Irenaeus  speaks  thus  of  the  Apocalypse: 
"  And  yet  more  evidently,  of  the  last  age,  and  of  the  ten  kings, 
among  whom  will  be  divided  the  Empire  which  now  exists,  has 
John  the  disciple  of  the  Lord  made  known  in  the  Apocalypse, 
etc. 

In  the  same  book,  Chap.  XIV.  2,  he  testifies:  "And  for 
this  cause,  John  in  the  Apocalypse  says  :  '  And  his  voice  was 
as  the  voice  of  many  waters.'  "     Apoc.  I.  15. 

Ibidem,  Chap.  XVII.  6 :  "  Incense,  saith  John  in  the  Apo- 
calypse, is  the  prayers  of  the  saints." 

In  Chapter  XVIII.  6 :  ''  There  is  an  altar  in  Heaven  (for 
thither  our  prayers  and  oblations  are  directed)  and  a  temple, 
as  John  says  in  the  Apocalypse :  'And  the  temple  of  God  was 
opened';  and  there  is  a  tabernacle:  'For  behold,' he  saith, 
'  the  tabernacle  of  God  in  which  he  dwells  with  men.'  "  Apoc. 
XI.  19;  XXI.  3. 

Equally  clear  quotations  are  found  in  op.  cit.  Lib.  IV.  XX. 
11;  XXI.  4;  XXX.  4;  Lib.  V.  XXVIII.  2;  XXX.  2,  4; 
XXXIV.  2  ;  XXXV.  2,  etc. 

From  these  researches,  we  are  led  to  believe  that  the 
church  of  Gaul  in  the  second  century  possessed  the  entire 
Canon. 

The  Canon  of  the  church  of  Proconsular  Africa  at  the  close 
of  the  second  century,  is  made  known  to  us  from  the 
works  of  TertuUian,  whose  literary  activity  ranges  from  195 
to  220. 

TertuUian  defends  against  Marcion  the  four  Gospels,  Lib. 
II.  adversus  Marcionem,  Cap.  II.* 

*Constituimu8  in  primis,  evangelicum  Instrumentum  Apostolos  auctores 
habere,  quibus  hoc  munus  Evangelii  promulgandi  ab  ipso  Domino  sit  impo- 
situm ;  si  et  Apostolicos,  non  tamen  solos,  sed  cum  Apostolis,  et  post  Apos- 
tolos. Quoniam  praedicatio  discipulorum  suspecta  fieri  posset  de  gloriae 
studio,  si  non  adsistat  illi  auctoritas  magistrorum,  imo  Christi,  qui  magistros 
Apostolos  fecit.  Denique,  nobis  fidem  ex  Apostolis  Joannes  et  Matthaeus 
insinuant ;  ex  Apostolicis,  Lucas  et  Marcus  instaurant,  etc. 
U 


322  THE  CANON  OF  N.   T.   OF  TERTULLIAN. 

Again  in  Chapter  V.  he  asserts  the  authorship  of  Matthew, 
Luke,  Mark  and  John.*  The  chapter  opens  with  a  clear  testi- 
mony for  the  greater  Pauline  Epistles  : 

"  In  summa,  si  constat  id  verius  quod  prius,  id  prius  quod 
et  ab  initio,  id  ab  initio,  quod  ab  Apostolis;  pariter  utique  con- 
stabit,  id  esse  ab  Apostolis  traditum,  quod  apud  ecclesias 
Apostolorum  fuerit  sacrosanctum.  Videamus  quod  lac  a  Paulo 
Corinthii  hauserint ;  ad  quam  regulam  Galatae  sint  recorrecti ; 
quid  legant  Philippenses,  Thcssalonicenses,  Ephesii ;  quid  etiam 
Romani  de  proximo  sonent,  quibus  Evangelium  et  Petrus  et 
Paulus  sanguine  quoque  suo  signatum  reliquerunt.  Habemus 
et  Joannis  alumnas  ecclesias.  Nam  etsi  Apocalypsim  ejus 
Marcion  respuit,  ordo  tamen  episcoporum  ad  originem  recen- 
sus,  in  Joannem  stabit  auctorem." 

Tertullian  certainly  received  thirteen  Epistles  of  Paul.  In 
Lib.  V.  adv.  Marcion,  XXI.  he  speaks  thus  of  the  Epistle  to 
Philemon :  f 

"  Soli  huic  Epistolae  brevitas  sua  profuit,  ut  falsarias  manus 
Marcionis  evaderet.  Miror  tamen,  cum  ad  unum  hominem 
literas  factas  receperit,  quid  ad  Timotheum  duas,  et  unam  ad 
Titum,  de  ecclesiastic©  statu  compositas  recusaverit.  Adfec- 
tavit,  opinor,  etiam  numerum  Epistolarum  interpolare." 

In  Lib.  V.  adv.  Marcion,  Cap.  I.  he  defends  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles :  "  Haec  figurarum  sacramenta,  si  tibi  displicent,  certa 
Acta  Apostolorum  (Act.  IX.)  hunc  mihi  ordinem  Pauli  tradide- 
runt,  a  te  quoque  non  negandum." 

In  Lib.  de  Pudicitia,  Cap.  XX.  Tertullian  cites  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews,  as  the  work  of  Barnabas. 

"  Volo  tamen  ex  redundantia  alicujus  etiam  comitis  Aposto- 
lorum testimonium  superducere,  idoneum  confirmandi  de  prox- 
imo jure  disciplinam  magistrorum.  Exstat  enim  et  Barnabae 
titulus  ad  Hebraeos,  adeo  satis  auctoritatis  viro,  ut  quem  Pau- 
lus juxta  se  constituerit  in  abstinentiae  tenore :  'Aut  ego  solus 
et  Barnabas  non  habemus  hoc  operandi  potestatem.'  Et  utique 
receptior  apud  Ecclesias  Epistola  Barnabae  illo  apocrypho 
Pastore  moechorum.  Monens  itaque  discipulos,  omissis  omni- 
bus initiis,  ad  perfectionem  magis  tendere,  nee  rursus  funda- 
menta  poenitentiae  jacere  ab  operibus  mortuorum :    Impossi- 

*Eadem  auctoritas  ecclesiarum  apostolicarum  caeteris  quoque  patrocina- 
bitur  Evangeliis,  quae  proinde  per  illas  et  secundum  illas  habemus,  Joannis 
dico  et  Matthaei,  licet  et  Marcus  quod  edidit  Petri  affirmetur,  cujusinterpres 
Marcus  :  nam  et  Lucae  Digestum  Paulo  adscribere  solent. 

fWe  quote  Tertullian  in  the  original  Latin,  as  his  genius  appears  to 
better  effect  in  the  original. 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.   OF  TERTULLIAN.  323 

bile  est  enim,  inquit,  eos  qui  semel  illuminati  sunt,  et  donum 
coeleste  gustaverunt,  et  participaverunt  Spiritum  Sanctum,  et 
verbum  Dei  dulce  gustaverunt,  occidente  jam  aevo  cum  exci- 
derint,  rursus  revocari  in  poenitentiam,  refigentes  cruci  in  se- 
metipsos  Filium  Dei  et  dedecorantes.  Terra  enim  quae  bibit 
saepius  devenientem  in  se  humorem,  et  peperit  herbam  aptam 
his  propter  quos  et  colitur,  benedictionem  Dei  consequitur : 
proferens  autem  spinas,  reproba  et  maledictioni  proxima,  cujus 
finis  in  exustionem.  Hoc  qui  ab  Apostolis  didicit  et  cum 
Apostolis  docuit,  nunquam  moecho  et  fornicatori  secundam 
poenitentiam  promissam  ab  Apostolis  norat ;  optime  enim  legem 
interpretabatur,  et  figuras  ejus  jam  in  ipsa  veritate  ser- 
vabat." 

In  introducing  this  passage,  Tertullian  shows  clearly  that, 
though  not  personally  certain  of  its  inspiration,  he  considered 
the  Epistle  of  great  authority. 

He  made  much  use  of  the  Apocalypse,  and  of  the  First 
Epistle  of  St.  John.  I  found  no  direct  references  to  the  other 
two  in  his  works,  but  in  Chapter  XIX.  De  Pudicitia,  he  says : 
"  Shall  we,  forsooth,  say  that  John  erred,  who  in  his  first 
Epistle  denies  that  we  are  without  sin."  It  was  certainly  in 
contradistinction  to  other  Epistles  that  he  calls  this  the  first. 
The  Second  and  Third  of  John  are  brief,  and  written  to  private 
individuals.  For  this  reason,  they  have  never  been  quoted  as 
much  as  the  first.  This  was  the  evident  cause,  also,  why  they 
are  not  expressly  quoted  by  Tertullian. 

In  Chapter  III.  De  Cultu  Foeminarum,  Tertullian  wishes 
to  obtain  endorsement  for  the  Book  of  Henoch :  "  And  more- 
over, Henoch  has  a  testimony  in  Jude  the  Apostle."  (Jude, 
V.  14.)  Though  he  erred  in  explaining  the  passage  of  Jude, 
he  is  a  competent  witness  that  the  Church  of  Africa 
possessed  in  that  day  the  Epistle  of  Jude  among  the  Holy 
Books. 

Tertullian  often  quotes  the  I.  Epistle  of  St.  Peter.  I  found 
no  quotations  from  the  Second  Epistle  in  his  works.  This 
argues  nothing  against  its  reception  by  the  Church  of  Africa ; 
Tertullian  may  have  had  no  occasion  to  quote  it. 

In  Lib.  adversus  Judaeos,  II.  he  used  the  expression: 
"  Abraham  amicus  Dei  deputatus,"  which  seems  to  be  taken 
from  James,  11.  23. 

The  II.  Epistle  of  Peter  is  the  only  book  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament which  has  nothing  in  the  works  of  Tertullian  ;  the  I, 
and  II.  of  John,  and  the  Epistle  of  James  have  but  probable 
approbation  ;  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  with  him  stops  a  lit- 


324   THE   CANON  OF   N.  T.  OF   CLEMENT   OF  ALEXANDRIA. 

tie  short  of  Canonicity,  but  all  the  other  books,  both  by  direct 
declaration  and  practical  use  are  endorsed  as  undoubted  Holy 
Scripture. 

In  the  works  of  St.  Cyprian,  who  succeeded  Tertullian  as 
chief  representative  of  the  African  Church,  abundant  quota- 
tions are  found  of  all  the  homologomena,  including  the  Apoca- 
lypse, but  he  is  silent  concerning  the  antilegomena.  It  would 
be  absurd  to  interpret  this  silence  as  a  condemnation  of  the 
books.  At  most,  we  may  say  that  the  exceedingly  conserva- 
tive spirit  of  Cyprian  drew  him  more  strongly  to  the  books  of 
which  no  one  doubted. 

The  tradition  of  the  Church  of  Alexandria  of  the  second 
century,  is  made  known  to  us  by  Clement.  Among  all  the 
early  Fathers,  Clement  is  the  most  favorable  to  Apocryphal 
writings.  There  is  no  evidence  that  he  made  them  equal  to 
Holy  Scripture,  but  he  was  willing  to  treat  with  consideration 
any  work  which  had  a  claim  to  respectability.  In  Lib.  III. 
Stromatum,  XIII.  he  shows  that  he  admitted  four  and  only 
four  Gospels.  Replying  there  to  an  objection  taken  from  an 
apocryphal  gospel,  he  says :  "  In  the  first  place,  in  the  four 
Gospels  which  have  been  handed  down  to  us,  we  have  not 
this  saying,  but  in  the  gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews." 

Clement's  position  regarding  the  books  of  Scripture  may 
be  learned  from  Eusebius,  Hist.  Eccles.  VI.  14. 

"  In  the  work  called  Hypotyposes,  to  sum  up  the  matter 
briefly,  he  has  given  us  abridged  accounts  of  all  the  canonical 
Scriptures,  not  even  omitting  those  that  are  disputed,  (The  An- 
tilegomena,) I  mean  the  book  of  Jude,  and  the  other  general 
Epistles.  Also  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas,  and  that  called  the 
Revelation  of  Peter.  But  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  he  as- 
serts was  written  by  Paul,  to  the  Hebrews,  in  the  Hebrew 
tongue ;  but  that  it  was  carefully  translated  by  Luke,  and  pub- 
lished among  the  Greeks.  Whence,  also,  one  finds  the  same 
character  of  style  and  of  phraseology  in  the  Epistle  as  in  the 
Acts.  *  But  it  is  probable  that  the  title,  Paul  the  Apostle,  was 
not  prefixed  to  it.  For  as  he  wrote  to  the  Hebrews,  who  had 
imbibed  prejudices  against  him,  and  suspected  him,  he  wisely 
guards  against  diverting  them  from  the  perusal,  by  giving  his 
name.'  A  little  after  this  he  observes :  *  But  now  as  the 
blessed  presbyter  used  to  say,  *  since  the  Lord  who  was  the 
apostle  of  the  Almighty,  was  sent  to  the  Hebrews,  Paul  by 
reason  of  his  inferiority,  as  if  sent  to  the  Gentiles,  did  not  sub- 
scribe himself  an  Apostle  of  the  Hebrews ;  both  out  of  rever- 
ence for  the  Lord,  and  because  he  wrote  of  his  abundance  to 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AT  CI.OSE  OF  II.  CENTURY.       325 

the  Hebrews,  as  a  herald  and  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles. 
Again,  in  the  same  work,  Clement  also  gives  the  tradition 
respecting  the  order  of  the  Gospels,  as  derived  from  the  oldest 
presbyster,  as  follows  :  He  says  that  those  which  contain  the 
genealogies  were  written  first;  but  that  the  Gospel  of  Mark  was 
occasioned  in  the  following  manner :  *  When  Peter  had  pro- 
claimed the  word  publicly  at  Rome,  and  declared  the  Gospel 
under  the  influence  of  the  spirit ;  as  there  was  a  great  number 
present,  they  requested  Mark,  who  had  followed  him  from  afar, 
and  remembered  well  what  he  had  said,  to  reduce  these  things 
to  writing,  and  that  after  composing  the  Gospel  he  gave  it  to 
those  who  requested  it  of  him.  Which,  when  Peter  under- 
stood, he  directly  neither  hindered  nor  encouraged  it.  But 
John,  last  of  all,  perceiving  that  what  had  reference  to  the 
body  in  the  Gospel  of  our  Saviour,  was  sufficiently  detailed, 
and  being  encouraged  by  his  familiar  friends,  and  urged  by  the 
spirit,  he  wrote  a  spiritual  Gospel.*     Thus  far  Clement." 

The  commentaries  of  Clement  on  the  I.  Epistle  of  St.  Peter, 
and  the  Epistle  of  St.  Jude  have  been  preserved  to  us  by  Cassio- 
dorus  in  a  Latin  translation  (Cassiod.  De  Inst.  Div.  Lit,  VHL). 

In  the  works  of  Clement  that  remain  to  us,  I  found  no  cer- 
tain reference  to  II.  Peter.  Some  allusions  to  St.  James' 
Epistle  exist  (Strom.  V.  14;  VI.  18.);  but  the  testimony  of 
Eusebius  leaves  no  doubt  that  Clement  received  these  works. 
Eusebius'  testimony  is  corroborated  by  Photius,  who  testifies 
that  Clement  commented  the  Epistles  of  Paul  and  the  Catholic 
Epistles  (Biblioth.  109.  Patrol.  G.  103,  384.) 

In  II.  Strom.  XV.  Clement  speaks  of  I.  John,  as  the  greater 
Epistle,  'Iwdwa  iv  rf  fjuet^ovt  eVtcrToX,?'.  This  shows  plainly  that 
he  recognized  at  least  one  of  the  others,  and,  as  we  have  said 
before,  the  history  of  the  two  is  the  same.  We  believe,  there- 
fore, that  Clement  received  them  both.  The  defect  of  explicit 
quotations  would  be  unjustly  invoked  against  those  short 
books,  which  are  of  secondary  importance  from  a  doctrinal 
standpoint 

The  greater  part  of  Clement's  Hypotyposes,  was  devoted 
to  the  exegesis  of  the  New  Testament.  Only  fragments  of 
the  work  remain  in  the  Latin  translation  of  Cassiodorus. 
Hence,  is  explained  that  in  those  fragments  we  find  not  Clem- 
ent's commentary  on  the  Epistle  of  St.  James,  on  II.  Peter, 
and  III,  John.  Without  doubt,  they  had  place  in  the  com- 
plete work  according  to  the  explicit  testimony  of  Eusebius. 

We  find,  therefore,  at  the  close  of  the  Second  Century,  that 
all  the  churches  concur  in  receiving  the  four  written  Gospels. 


326       THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AT  CLOSE  Of  II.  CENTURY. 

These  were  sometimes  called  the  "  Writings  of  the  Lord." 
Thus  Dionysius  of  Corinth  in  Epistle  to  Romans:  "  It  is  not, 
therefore,  matter  of  wonder  if  some  have  also  attempted  to 
adulterate  the  sacred  writings  of  the  Lord,  since  they  have 
attempted  the  same  in  other  works,  that  are  not  to  be  com- 
pared with  these." 

The  writers  of  this  period  also  give  evidence,  that  they 
already  of  old  time  received  these  Gospels,  and  only  these 
Gospels,  were  received  by  all  the  churches. 

Certain  allusions  to  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  are  found  in 
the  writings  of  Clement  of  Rome,  Ignatius  martyr,  and  St. 
Justin ;  but  the  testimony  of  the  Canon  of  Muratori  is  explicit 
for  their  canonicity.  The  faith  of  Irenaeus,  as  we  have  seen. 
was  the  same.  Tertullian  inveighs  bitterly  against  those  (the 
Manicheans)  who  rejected  the  Acts : 

" —  et  utique  implevit  repromissum,  probantibus  Actis 
Apostolorum,  descensum  Spiritus  Sancti.  Quam  Scripturam 
qui  non  recipiunt,  nee  Spiritus  Sancti  esse  possunt,  qui  nec- 
dum  Spiritum  possint  agnoscere  discentibus  missum,  sed  nee 
Ecclesiam  defendere,  qui,  quando  et  quibus  incunabulis  insti- 
tutum  est  hoc  corpus,  probare  non  habent." 

Clement  of  Alexandria  also  makes  great  use  of  this  Scrip- 
ture, and  attributes  it  to  Paul.  All  things  warrant  that  it  had 
a  place  in  the  Canon  in  all  the  churches,  before  the  close  of 
the  second  century,  and  no  doubt  has  since  been  raised  in  the 
Catholic  Church  concerning  it. 

From  a  conspectus  of  the  preceding  data,  it  is  evident  that, 
excepting  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  all  the  Epistles  of  Paul 
were  universally  accepted  as  Holy  Scripture.  It  is  not  the 
place  here  to  answer  the  objections  of  F.  Chr.  Baur  against  the 
Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians.  Those  objections,  or  rather 
cavils,  are  sought  from  the  nature  of  the  books  themselves,  and 
will  be  answered  in  the  exegesis  of  the  books.  We  are  here 
dealing  only  with  the  belief  of  the  Church  regarding  the  books 
of  Scripture  and  the  evidences  of  this,  as  regards  thirteen 
Epistles  of  Paul  is  convincing.  Even  the  short  Epistle  to 
Philemon  finds  its  place  in  Muratori's  Canon,  and  in  the  words 
of  Tertullian  (loc.  cit.),  escaped  the  mutilation  of  Marcion.  In 
the  words  of  St.  Jerome :  "  It  would  never  have  been  received 
by  all  the  churches  throughout  the  whole  world,  unless  it  was 
held  to  be  Paul's  Epistle."     (Prol.  in  Philem.) 

In  this  period,  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  was  received 
with  more  favor  in  the  East  than  in  the  West.  We  know  from 
Eusebius  (loc.  cit.)  that  Clement  of  Alexandria  received  it. 


THE   CANON   OF   N.  T.  AT   CLOSE   O^i"   II.  CENTURY.        327 

Clement's  testimony  is  confirmed  by  that  of  Pantaenus  (the 
blessed  presbyter).  (Euseb.  Hist.  Eccles.  VI.  14.)  All  the 
Fathers  of  the  Alexandrian  Church  have  accepted  and  used 
the  Epistle. 

Its  presence,  as  fourteenth  among  Paul's  Epistles,  in  the 
Peschito,  is  sufficient  guarantee  of  its  reception  by  the  ancient 
Syrian  Church. 

In  reviewing  the  works  of  Irenaeus,  we  have  pointed  out 
his  references  to  this  Epistle.  Eusebius  (loc.  cit.)  confirms  our 
belief  that  Irenaeus  received  it.'^ 

The  testimony  of  Tertullian,  while  it  does  not  place  the 
book  beyond  the  possibility  of  doubt,  recognizes  the  book  as 
widely  known  and  respected.  The  status  of  the  book  grew 
constantly  more  favorable  in  the  Western  Church  from  this 
time  forth. 

Rome  seems  to  have  been  the  centre  of  the  doubts  of  that 
period  regarding  the  divine  authority  of  the  book.  We  have 
seen  that  it  is  omitted  from  the  Canon  of  Muratori,  and  Euse- 
bius testifies  also  in  Hist.  Eccles.  VI.  20,  that  Caius  of  Rome 
and  other  Romans,  did  not  receive  the  Epistle. 

The  testimony  of  the  first  two  centuries  in  favor  of  St. 
James'  Epistle  might  be  summed  up  as  follows :  Clear  refer- 
ences in  the  works  of  Clement  of  Rome  ;  allusions  in  the 
works  of  Justin  and  Irenaeus;  quotations  in  the  Pastor  of 
Hermas ;  and  a  place  among  the  canonical  Scriptures  in  the 
Peschito. 

The  testimonies  of  this  period  in  favor  of  the  First  Epistle 
of  Peter  are  clear  and  explicit.  Eusebius  testifies,  Hist.  Eccles. 
III.  39,  that  Papias  made  use  of  testimonies  from  it.  At  least 
eight  quotations  from  it  are  found  in  the  short  Epistle  of 
Polycarp,  that  is  preserved  for  us.  The  finest  testimonies  for 
it  exist  in  the  works  of  Clement,  Irenaeus  and  Tertullian.  We 
have  already  explained  its  omission  from  Muratori's  Canon. 

For  the  Second  Epistle  of  St.  Peter,  we  have  nothing 
clearer  in  the  first  two  centuries,  than  the  references  already 
adduced  in  the  works  of  Irenaeus.  With  Origen  the  data  be- 
comes more  convincing. 

The  Epistle  of  Jude  has  a  secure  place  in  the  Canon  of 
Muratori.  Tertullian  (loc.  cit.)  uses  it  as  an  authority 
acknowledged  by  all.     Clement  of  Alexandria  commented  it. 

*The  statement  of  Gobar  in  Biblioth,  of  Photius,  that  Irenaeus  rejected 
Paul's  authorship  of  the  Epistle,  may  simply  mean  that  he  doubted  of  the 
author,  but  not  of  the  divine  character  of  the  book.  Such  view  was  held  by 
more  than  one. 


328       THE  CANON   OF   N.  T.  AT   CLOSE   OF   II.  CENTURY. 

St.  Jerome  declares  that :  "  Jude  left  a  short  epistle,  which  is 
one  of  the  seven  Catholic  Epistles ;  since  he  assumes  a  testi- 
mony from  the  apocryphal  book  of  Henoch,  it  is  rejected  by 
several;  nevertheless,  it  merits  authority  by  its  antiquity  and 
use,  and  is  reckoned  among  the  Holy  Scriptures."  (S.  Hier. 
De  Vir.  111.  M.  23,  645.) 

The  First  Epistle  of  John  was  known  and  used  by  Papias 
and  Polycarp.  Irenaeus  quotes  it  frequently,  often  naming  its 
author.  The  Canon  of  Muratori  places  it  among  the  Canon- 
ical Scriptures.  Tertullian  and  Clement  of  Alexandria  make 
it  equal  to  the  Gospel  of  St.  John.  The  Peschito  of  the  Syriac 
places  it  among  the  canonical  Scriptures,  and  no  reasonable 
doubt  has  ever  been  raised  concerning  it. 

The  other  two  Epistles  of  John  have  not  equal  indorse- 
ment in  these  two  centuries.  In  the  testimony  of  Jerome 
(De  Vir.  111.  IX.  18),  John's  authorship  of  these  two  Epistles 
was  rejected  by  many  (plerisque).  Investigation  into  patristic 
literature,  fails  to  make  known  who  these  many  were. 

The  Epistles  have  an  indirect  approbation  in  Tertullian, 
De  Pudic.  19,  where  he  speaks  of  the  First  Epistle  of  John  as 
prima.  Had  he  admitted  only  two,  he  would  undoubtedly 
have  used,  in  pHore.  We  have  before  shown  that  Irenaeus 
received  the  Second  Epistle  of  John,  and  as  the  history  of  the 
two  is  intimately  bound  up  together,  we  believe  that  he  re- 
ceived also  the  Third.  The  same  can  be  said  of  Clement  of 
Alexandria,  who  in  Strom.  II.  15,  speaks  of  I.  John  as  the 
greater  Epistle.  Fragments  of  his  commentary  on  II.  John 
are  preserved  for  us  by  Cassiodorus,  (op.  cit.).  Finally  Mur- 
atori's  Canon  leaves  no  reasonable  doubt  that  the  three 
Epistles  were  received  in  the  Church  of  Rome. 

There  is  scarcely  a  book  in  the  New  Testament,  which  re- 
ceived so  many  clear  testimonies  in  the  second  century  as  the 
Apocalypse.  On  the  testimony  of  Irenaeus,  we  know  that  the 
book  was  written  toward  the  close  of  the  reign  of  Domitian, 
therefore,  about  the  year  95  A.  D.  Wherefore  no  testimonies 
of  the  first  century  are  to  be  sought.  But  in  the  following  age 
St.  Justin,  St.  Hippolyte,  Tertullian,  Irenaeus,  Papias,  Melito 
of  Sardis,  St.  Theophilus  of  Antioch,  Clement  of  Alexandria 
and  the  Canon  of  Muratori,  testify  to  its  authenticity  and 
divine  character.  Opposition  and  doubt  arose  in  the  following 
century  concerning  it.  Certain  heretics  arose  at  that  time 
who  abused  its  authority  to  acquire  favor  for  Millenarianism. 
Hence,  though  we  find  none  who  reject  it,  the  Fathers  made 
less  use  of  it,  as  its  deep  mysterious  sense  perplexed  the  minds 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  OF  III.  CENTURY.       329 

of  these  who  were  defending  Catholic  truth  against  the  error 
of  the  Chiliasts.  St.  Dionysius  the  Great,  one  of  the  leading 
Fathers,  in  combating  this  heresy,  thus  speaks  of  the 
book : 

"  Some,  indeed,  before  us,  have  set  aside,  and  have  at- 
tempted to  refute  the  whole  book,  criticising  every  chapter, 
and  pronouncing  it  without  sense  and  without  reason.  They 
say  that  it  has  a  false  title,  for  it  is  not  of  John.  Nay,  that  it 
is  not  even  a  revelation,  as  it  is  covered  with  such  a  dense  and 
thick  veil  of  ignorance,  that  not  one  of  the  Apostles,  and  not 
one  of  the  holy  men,  or  those  of  the  church  could  be  its  author. 
But  that  Cerinthus,  the  founder  of  the  sect  of  Cerinthians,  so 
called  from  him,  wishing  to  have  reputable  authority  for  his 
own  fiction,  prefixed  the  title.  For  this  is  the  doctrine  of 
Cerinthus,  that  there  will  be  an  earthly  reign  of  Christ ;  and 
as  he  was  a  lover  of  the  body,  and  altogether  sensual  in  those 
things  which  he  so  eagerly  craved,  he  dreamed  that  he  would 
revel  in  the  gratification  of  the  sensual  appetite,  i.  e.  in  eating 
and  drinking,  and  marrying;  and  to  give  the  things  a  milder 
aspect  and  expression,  in  festivals  and  sacrifices,  and  the  slay- 
ing of  victims.  For  my  part  I  would  not  venture  to  set 
this  book  aside,  as  there  are  many  brethren  that  value  it 
much ;  but  having  formed  a  conception  of  its  subject  as  ex- 
ceeding my  capacity,  I  consider  it  also  containing  a  certain  con- 
cealed and  wonderful  intimation  in  each  particular.  For, 
though  I  do  not  understand,  yet  I  suspect  that  some  deeper 
sense  is  enveloped  in  the  words,  and  these  I  do  not  measure 
and  judge  by  my  private  reason  ;  but  allowing  more  to  faith,  I 
have  regarded  them  as  too  lofty  to  be  comprehended  by  me, 
and  those  things  which  I  do  not  understand,  I  do  not  reject, 
but  I  wonder  the  more  that  I  cannot  comprehend." 

At  the  opening  of  the  third  century,  we  find  the  Canon  of 
the  New  Testament  well  established  not  by  official  decree  but 
by  traditional  usage.  Certain  divergencies  existed  regarding 
a  few  books.  Muratori's  Canon  omits  the  Epistle  of  St. 
James;  while  Clement  of  Alexandria  uses  it  as  though  all  the 
churches  recognized  its  divine  authority. 

The  two  great  representatives  of  Catholic  thought  of  the 
Third  Century  are  Origen  and  Eusebius. 

The  capacious  mind  of  Origen  examined  the  different  col- 
lections of  Scripture  of  the  different  churches,  and  compared 
them.  His  views  respecting  the  Gospels  are  manifested  in  his 
Homily  on  Luke;  "The  Church  has  four  Gospels;  heresy  has 
many.     *     *     *     Only    four   Gospels   are    approved,   out   of 


THE  CANON  OF  N.   T.   OF  ORIGEN. 

which  as  representing  our  Law  and  Saviour,  dogmas  are  to  be 
proven.  *  *  *  In  all  these  we  admit  naught  else  than  is 
admitted  by  the  Church,  that  only  four  Gospels  are  to  be  re- 
ceived." 

Some  recur  to  a  testimony  from  Origen  in  Eusebius,  Hist. 
Eccles.  VI.  25,  to  establish  Origen's  Canon : 

"  As  I  have  understood  from  tradition,  respecting  the  four 
Gospels,  which  are  the  only  undisputed  ones  in  the  whole 
Church  of  God  throughout  the  world.  The  first  is  written  ac- 
cording to  Matthew,  the  same  that  was  once  a  publican,  but 
afterwards  an  Apostle  of  Jesus  Christ,  who  having  published  it 
for  the  Jewish  converts,  wrote  it  in  the  Hebrew.  The  second 
is  according  to  Mark,  who  composed  it,  as  Peter  explained  to 
him,  whom  he  also  acknowledges  as  his  son  in  his  general 
Epistle,  saying,  '  The  elect  church  in  Babylon,  salutes  you,  as 
also  Mark  my  son.'  And  the  third,  according  to  Luke,  the 
Gospel  commended  by  Paul,  which  was  written  for  the  converts 
from  the  Gentiles,  and  last  of  all  the  Gospel  according  to  John." 
And  in  the  fifth  book  of  his  Commentaries  on  John,  the  same 
author  writes  as  follows :  "  But  he  (Paul)  being  well  fitted  to 
be  a  minister  of  the  New  Testament,  I  mean  a  minister  not  of 
the  letter  but  of  the  spirit ;  who,  after  spreading  the  Gospel 
from  Jerusalem  and  the  country  around  as  far  as  Illyricum,  did 
not  even  write  to  all  the  churches  to  which  he  preached,  but 
even  to  those  to  whom  he  wrote  he  only  sent  a  few  lines.  But 
Peter,  upon  whom  the  Church  of  Christ  is  built,  against  which 
the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail,  has  left  one  Epistle  undis- 
puted. Suppose,  also,  the  second  was  left  by  him,  for  on  this 
there  is  some  doubt.  What  shall  we  say  of  him  who  reclined 
upon  the  breast  of  Jesus,  I  mean  John  ?  who  has  left  one  Gos- 
pel, in  which  he  confesses  that  he  could  write  so  many  that  the 
whole  world  could  not  contain  them.  He  also  wrote  the  Apo- 
calypse, commanded  as  he  was,  to  conceal,  and  not  to  write 
the  voices  of  the  seven  thunders.  He  has  also  left  an  Epistle 
consisting  of  very  few  lines ;  suppose,  also,  that  a  second  and 
third  is  from  him,  for  not  all  agree  that  they  are  genuine,  but 
both  together  do  not  contain  a  hundred  lines."  To  these  re- 
marks he  also  adds  the  following  observation  on  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews,  in  his  homilies  on  the  same  ;  "  The  style  of 
the  Epistle  with  the  title,  '  To  the  Hebrews,'  has  not  that  sim- 
plicity of  diction  which  belongs  to  the  Apostle,  who  confesses 
that  he  is  but  common  in  speech,  that  is  in  his  phraseology. 
But  that  this  Epistle  is  more  pure  Greek  in  the  composition  of 
its  phrases,  every  one  will  confess  who  is  able  to  discern  the 


THE  CANON   OF  N.   T.   OF  ORIGEN.  331 

difference  of  style.  Again,  it  will  be  obvious  that  the  ideas  of 
the  Epistle  are  admirable,  and  not  inferior  to  any  of  the  books 
acknowledged  to  be  apostolic.  Every  one  will  confess  the 
truth  of  this,  who  attentively  reads  the  Apostle's  writings." 
To  these  he  afterwards  again  adds :  "  But  I  would  say,  that  the 
thoughts  are  the  Apostle's,  but  the  diction  and  phraseology 
belong  to  some  one,  who  has  recorded  what  the  Apostle  said, 
and  as  one  who  noted  down  at  his  leisure  what  his  master  dic- 
tated. If,  then,  any  church  considers  this  Epistle  as  coming 
from  Paul,  let  it  be  commended  for  this,  for  neither  did  those 
ancient  men  deliver  it  as  such  without  cause.  But  who  it  was 
that  really  wrote  the  Epistle,  God  only  knows.  The  account, 
however,  that  has  been  current  before  us  is,  according  to  some, 
that  Clement  who  was  bishop  of  Rome  wrote  the  Epistle ;  ac- 
cording to  others,  that  it  was  written  by  Luke,  who  wrote  the 
Gospel  and  the  Acts." 

The  Epistles  of  James  and  Jude  are  omitted;  II.  Peter  and 
II.  and  III.  John  are  considered  doubtful.  It  would  be  erro- 
neous to  accept  this  as  Origen's  position  on  the  Canon.  The 
passage  is  found  in  the  beginning  of  the  fifth  tome  of  his  Com- 
mentary on  St.  John.  He  is  there  justifying  himself  for  not 
writing  more,  and  cites  the  example  of  some  of  the  writers  of 
the  New  Testament.  To  make  the  argument  forcible,  he  re- 
stricts the  works  in  the  narrowest  compass,  and  uses  for  this 
scope  the  occasional  doubts  that  existed  in  some  churches. 
In  fact,  Origen,  through  display  of  erudition,  mentions  there 
doubts  which  he  did  not  personally  entertain.  There  was  no 
need  of  a  complete  list  of  the  writers,  and  he  has  not  drawn 
up.  a  complete  list.  He  took  the  more  prominent.  It  is  evi- 
dent that  it  was  not  his  intention  to  enumerate  all  the  books 
of  the  New  Testament. 

Origen  quoted  II.  Peter  in  his  XII.  Homily  on  Exodus,  4 : 
"  I  know  that  it  is  written :  '  For  of  whom  a  man  is  overcome, 
of  the  same  is  he  brought  in  bondage.' "     II.  Pet.  II.  19. 

Again  in  Hom.  IV.  on  Levit.  4:  "And  again  Peter  saith : 
•  Ye  are  become  partakers  of  the  divine  nature.'  "     II.  Pet.  I.  4. 

Hom.  XIII.  on  Num.  8:  " —  as  the  Scripture  saith  in  a  cer- 
tain place  :  '  —  the  dumb  ass,  speaking  with  man's  voice,  for- 
bade the  madness  of  the  prophet.'  "     II.  Pet.  II.  16. 

Origen  reveals  his  personal  opinion  of  the  Epistle  of  Jude 
in  Comment,  in  Math.  Tom.  X.  17:  "And  Jude  wrote  an 
Epistle,  of  few  verses,  indeed,  but  full  of  efificacious  words  of 
divine  grace  ;  which  he  begins  by  saying  :  '  Jude,  the  servant  of 
Jesus  Christ,  brother  of  James.'  "     Nevertheless,  Origen  was 


332  THE   CANON   OF   N.   T.    OF   ORIGEN. 

not  ignorant  that  some  doubted  of  this  Epistle,  and  he  takes 
account  of  this  doubt  in  op.  cit.  Tom,  XVII. :  "  If  any  one  re- 
ceives also  the  Epistle  of  Jude,  let  him  consider  what  follows 
from  this  doctrine,  for  the  reason  that :  '  The  Angels  who  kept 
not  their  first  estate,  but  left  their  first  habitation,  he  hath  re- 
served in  everlasting  chains  under  darkness  unto  the  judgment 
of  the  great  day.'  "     Jude,  I.  6. 

In  this  citation  Origen  simply  shows  his  comprehensive 
knowledge  of  the  thought  of  his  day.  He  received  the 
Epistle,  but  in  arguing  therefrom,  he  had  to  take  into  con- 
sideration that  its  authority  would  not  have  equal  weight  with 
all.  It  required  a  great  deal  in  those  days  to  secure  for  a  book 
immunity  from  doubt ;  a  slight  cause  was  sufficient  to  raise 
some  doubt,  which  "crescebat  eundo,"  concerning  some  of  the 
minor  books  of  the  Testament. 

Equally  certain  are  Origen's  views  on  St.  James'  Epistle. 
In  Horn.  VIII.  in  Exod.  4,  he  says:  "But  the  Apostle  James 
says:  *A  double-minded  man  is  unstable  in  all  his  ways.'" 
James,  I.  8. 

In  Hom.  II.  in  Levit.  4:  "Thus  saith  Holy  Scripture: 
*  — who  converteth  the  sinner  from  the  error  of  his  way,  shall 
save  a  soul  from  death,  and  shall  hide  a  multitude  of  sins.'  " 
James,  V.  20. 

In  Hom.  XIII.  in  Genesim,  2,  Origen  likens  the  books  of 
the  New  Testament  to  the  wells  which  Isaac  and  his  servants 
dug,  and  he  places  James  and  Jude  in  the  number.  In  this 
simile,  Isaac  represents  the  Lord.  The  servants  of  Isaac 
represent  the  other  authors  of  the  New  Testament :  "  Isaac, 
therefore,  dug  new  wells ;  the  servants  of  Isaac  dug  new  wells 
also.  The  servants  of  Isaac  are  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke  and 
John.  His  servants  are  Peter,  James  and  Jude,  and  also  Paul, 
for  they  all  dug  the  wells  of  the  New  Testament." 

Upon  this  data  we  believe  that  Origen's  Canon  is  that 
which  he  makes  known  to  us  in  his  Seventh  Homily  on  the 
Book  of  Joshua,  i,  wherein  he  compares  the  authors  of  the 
New  Testament  to  Joshua  and  the  priests  who  besieged 
Jericho  :  "  The  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  of  whom  that  first  Joshua 
was  a  type,  coming,  sends  priests,  his  Apostles  bearing  trum- 
pets of  rams'  horns,  the  grand  and  heavenly  doctrine  of  the 
Gospel.  Matthew  sounded  first  the  sacerdotal  trumpet  in  his 
Gospel ;  Mark  follows  ;  then  Luke  and  John  blow  their  proper 
trumpets.  Peter  sends  forth  blasts  from  the  trumpets  of  his 
two  Epistles  ;  James  a.ndjude  do  likewise.  John  joins  in  with 
the  trumpet-blast  of  his  Epistles  and  Apocalypse,  and  Luke 


THE   CANON   OF   N.   T.   OF   EUSEBIUS.  333 

with  the  Acts  of   the  Apostles.     And  lastly  comes  he  who 
said  :  *  For  I  think  that  God  hath  set  forth  us,  the  Apostles, 
the  least  of  men,'  and  thundering  through  the  trumpets  of  his 
fourteen  Epistles  completely  overthrows  the  engines  of  idola 
try  and  the  dogmas  of  the  philosophers." 

In  ascribing  a  plurality  of  Epistles  to  John,  the  Second  and 
Third  of  his  Epistles  are  virtually  approved,  for  they  are  in- 
separably linked  together  in  their  history. 

Origen  is  not  here  formulating  a  new  theory.  He  is  there 
the  oracle  of  two  centuries  of  Catholic  belief  and  practice. 

The  place  in  the  Catholic  Church  which  the  Holy  Books 
had  acquired  in  Origen's  time,  they  have  retained  ever  since. 

The  sporadic  doubts  which  in  the  course  of  the  centuries 
arose  and  fell,  availed  naught  to  shake  their  credit  in  the 
Church.  The  books  were  a  part  of  the  mighty  life  of  the 
Church,  and  the  occasional  doubts  of  individuals  only  served  to 
bring  out  more  clearly  the  doctrine  which  was  the  same  from 
the  beginning. 

The  documents  which  we  shall  henceforth  adduce  will  be 
chosen  out  of  the  universal  testimony  of  tradition,  on  account 
of  their  special  bearing  on  the  deuterocanonical  books. 

DiONYSiUS  THE  GREAT,  the  disciple  of  Origen,  cites  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  as  the  work  of  Paul.  He  employs  the 
Epistle  of  James  (Fragment  on  Luke  XXH.),  and  recognizes 
the  First  and  Second  Epistles  of  John.  (Euseb.  Hist.  Eccles. 
vn.  25.) 

Methodius  of  Tyr,  cites  the  Apocalypse  as  inspired  by 
Christ,  and  makes  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  equal  to  the 
other  Epistles  of  Paul.     (Conviv.  Or.  I.  5  ;  Or.  VIH.  4.) 

Eusebius  of  Caesarea,  who  was  a  diligent  searcher  into  the 
traditions  and  documents  of  his  times,  has  treated  the  ques- 
tion of  the  Canon  of  the  New  Testament  ex  professo  in  his 
Hist.  Eccles.  HI.  25  : 

"  This  appears  also  to  be  the  proper  place,  to  give  a  sum- 
mary statement  of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  already 
mentioned.  And  here,  among  the  first,  must  be  placed  the 
holy  Quaternion  of  the  Gospels ;  these  are  followed  by  the 
book  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles;  after  this  must  be  men- 
tioned the  Epistles  of  Paul,  which  are  followed  by  the  acknow- 
ledged First  Epistle  of  John,  as  also  the  First  of  Peter,  to  be  ad- 
mitted in  like  manner.  After  these,  are  to  be  placed,  if  proper, 
the  Revelation  of  John,  concerning  which  we  shall  offer  the 
different  opinions  in  due  time.  These,  then,  are  acknowledged 
genuine.     Among  the  disputed  books,  although  they  are  well 


334  THE  CANON    OF  N.   T.   OF    EUSEBIUS. 

known  and  approved  by  many,  are  reputed,  that  called  the 
Epistle  of  James  and  that  of  Jude.  Also  the  '  Second  Epistle 
of  Peter,'  and  those  called  "  The  Second  and  Third  of  John," 
whether  they  are  of  the  Evangelist  or  of  some  other  of  the 
same  name.  Among  the  spurious  must  be  numbered,  both 
the  books  called  '  The  Acts  of  Paul,'  and  that  called  '  Pastor,' 
and  *  The  Revelation  of  Peter.'  Beside  these,  the  books  called 
*  The  Epistle  of  Barnabas,'  and  what  are  called  *  The  Institu- 
tions of  the  Apostles.'  Moreover,  as  I  said  before,  if  it  should 
appear  right,  "The  Revelation  of  John,"  which  some,  as  before 
said,  reject,  but  others  rank  among  the  genuine.  But  there 
are  also  some  who  number  among  these,  the  Gospel  according 
to  the  Hebrews,  with  which  those  of  the  Hebrews  that  have 
received  Christ  are  particularly  delighted.  These  may  be  said 
to  be  all  concerning  which  there  is  any  dispute.  We  have, 
however,  necessarily  subjoined  here  a  catalogue  of  these  also, 
in  order  to  distinguish  those  that  are  true,  genuine,  and  well 
authenticated  writings,  from  those  others  which  are  not  only 
not  embodied  in  the  Canon,  but  likewise  disputed,  notwith- 
standing that  they  are  recognized  by  most  ecclesiastical 
writers. 

Thus  we  may  have  it  in  our  power  to  know  both  these 
books,  and  those  that  are  adduced  by  the  heretics  under  the 
name  of  the  Apostles,  such,  viz.,  as  compose  the  Gospels  of 
Peter,  Thomas,  and  Matthew,  and  others  beside  them,  or  such 
as  contain  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  by  Andrew,  and  John,  and 
others,  of  which  no  one  of  those  writers  in  the  ecclesiastical 
succession  has  condescended  to  make  any  mention  in  his  works  ; 
and,  indeed,  the  character  of  the  style  itself  is  very  dififerent 
from  that  of  the  Apostles,  and  the  sentiments,  and  the 
purport  of  those  things  that  are  advanced  in  them, 
deviating  as  far  as  possible  from  sound  orthodoxy,  evidently 
proves  that  they  are  the  fictions  of  heretical  men ;  whence 
they  are  to  be  ranked  not  only  among  the  spurious  writ- 
ings, but  are  to  be  rejected  as  altogether  absurd  and 
impious." 

Eusebius  has  not  passed  definite  judgment  on  the  question 
of  the  Canon.  As  a  faithful  historian  he  records  the  historical 
status  of  the  books.  The  echo  of  the  doubts  which  had  their 
origin  in  the  preceding  ages  could  not  be  stilled  except  by  the 
authoritative  voice  of  the  Church. 

Eusebius  arranges  the  books  in  three  classes.  First  came 
TO,  ofioXo'yovfieva,  the  books  of  which  no  one  ever  doubted. 
These  are  the  four  Gospels,  the  Acts,  the  Epistles  of  Paul,  the  I. 


THE  CANON    OF  N.  T.   OF  EUSEBIUS.  336 

of  Peter,  the  I.  of  John,  and,  if  one  judges  well,  {el  ^avdrf)  the 
Apocalypse.  It  is  evident  that  Eusebius  includes  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews  in  Paul's  Epistles,since  it  was  universally  known 
in  his  day,  and  he  places  it  in  no  other  class.  Moreover,  in 
lib.  cit.  III.  he  had  declared  "that  the  fourteen  Epistles  of 
Paul  were  manifestly  known  to  all." 

The  second  class  is  made  up  of  the  avriXeyoixeva,  yvmpcfia 
Be  Tot9  TToXkol^,  the  books  which  had  been  doubted  of  by  some, 
but  received  by  the  many.  These  are  the  Epistle  of  James, 
the  Epistle  of  Jude,  II.  Peter,  and  II.  and  III.  of  John. 

The  third  class  he  calls  spurious,  v66a,  composed  of  the  Acts 
of  Paul,  Pastor,  the  Apocalypse  of  Peter,  the  Epistle  of  Barna- 
bas, the  Doctrine  of  the  Apostles,  the  Gospel  according  to  the 
Hebrews,  and,  if  it  seems  well,  the  Apocalypse  of  John.  In  an 
inferior  place  he  ranges  the  impious  books,  the  inventions  of 
heretics. 

This  document  contains  not  so  much  the  present  status  of 
the  books,  as  their  past  history ;  Eusebius  fills  the  role  of  a 
chronicler,  not  a  critic. 

The  peculiar  position  of  the  Apocalypse  is  the  effect  of  the 
causes  before  mentioned.  Up  to  the  middle  of  the  third  cen- 
tury, the  work  had  been  received  by  all.  In  virtue  of  this 
universal  acceptance  Eusebius  gives  it  its  place  among  the  books 
of  the  first  Canon.  The  rise  of  the  Millenarian  heresy  drew 
opposition  upon  the  book.  Its  mysterious  sense  was  abused 
by  the  Millenarians;  and  the  defenders  of  the  faith,  being 
hard  pressed,  began  by  casting  doubt  upon  the  authenticity 
of  the  book,  and  later,  upon  its  divine  character.  Hence,  some 
rejected  the  book  as  spurious.  As  Eusebius  rightly  says, 
it  was  accepted  by  all  in  one  period  of  history ;  it  was  rejected 
by  some  in  another.  He  does  not  decide  the  issue ;  he  adduces 
the  historical  data,  and  allows  the  reader  to  decide. 

In  op.  cit.  Lib.  3,  Eusebius  speaks  thus:  "As  to  the  writ- 
ing of  Peter,  one  of  his  Epistles  called  the  First,  is  acknowledged 
as  genuine.  For  this  was  anciently  used  by  the  ancient 
Fathers  in  their  writings,  as  an  undoubted  work  of  the  Apostle. 
But  that  which  is  called  the  Second,  we  have  not,  indeed, 
understood  to  be  embodied  with  the  sacred  books,  evSiaOrj^^^ov, 
yet  as  it  appeared  useful  to  many,  it  was  studiously  read  with 
the  other  Scriptures." 

Again,  ibid.:  "  The  Epistles  of  Paul  are  fourteen,  all  well 
known  and  beyond  doubt.  It  should  not,  however,  be  con- 
cealed, that  some  have  set  aside  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 


336  THE    CANON    OF  N.   T.   OF  ATHANASIUS. 

saying,  that  it  was  disputed,  as  not  being  one  of  St.  Paul's 
Epistles  ;  but  we  shall  in  the  proper  place,  also  subjoin  what 
has  been  said  by  those  before  our  time  respecting  this 
Epistle." 

Eusebius  is  inclined  to  magnify  the  importance  of  the  in- 
dividual doubts,  lest  he  should  be  thought  to  have  been  ignor- 
ant of  them.  The  fact  that  a  book  was  not  mentioned  by  many 
ancient  Fathers,  though  explainable  from  the  nature  of  the 
writing,  was  often  taken  by  him  as  an  evidence  of  doubt.  And 
yet,  the  testimony  of  tradition  even  at  his  hands  is  most  favor- 
able to  our  books. 

The  Church  of  Alexandria  seems  to  have  cleared  itself 
from  all  doubt  in  the  fourth  century. 

St.  Athanasius,  its  oracle  in  that  age,  thus  manifests  its 
faith :  "  The  books  of  the  New  Testament  are  the  four 
Gospels  of  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke  and  John  respectively ;  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles  ;  Seven  Epistles,  which  are  one  of  James, 
two  of  Peter,  three  of  John  and  one  of  Jude.  The  Fourteen 
Epistles  of  Paul  follow  in  this  order:  Romans,  two  to  the 
Corinthians,  Galatians,  Ephesians,  Philippians,]!;Colossians,  two 
to  the  Thessalonians,  Hebrews,  two  to  Timothy,  one  to  Titus, 
and  one  to  Philemon.  Lastly  comes  the  Apocalypse  of 
John. 

These  are  the  fountains  of  salvation,  where  the  thirst  of 
those  who  thirst  for  the  living  words  is  slaked.  Through  these 
alone  the  doctrine  of  faith  is  delivered.  Let  no  one  add  to 
them  or  take  from  them."  (Epist.  Fest.  XXXIX).  There  is 
an  air  of  security  in  these  words  that  indicates  that  the  faith  of 
the  Church  of  Christ  was  back  of  the  speaker.  The  Canon  of 
Athanasius  is  the  Canon  of  Trent,  because  the  faith  of  the 
Church  in  whose  name  he  spoke  was  the  same  then  as  when 
she  pronounced  her  definitive  decree. 

Cyrill  of  Jerusalem  formulates  the  same  canon  with  the 
exclusion  of  the  Apocalypse,  (Cyrill,  Cat.  IV.  36).  In  the 
fourth  century  this  book  encountered  severe  opposition  in  the 
East,  on  account  of  its  abuse  by  the  Chiliasts. 

St.  Epiphanius  enumerates  the  books  of  the  Canon :  The 
Four  Gospels,  the  fourteen  Epistles  of  Paul,  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles,  the  seven  Catholic  Epistles,  and  the  Apocalypse. 
(Haer.  ^e) 

Gregory  of  Nazianzus  has  the  same  Canon,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  the  Apocalypse,  which  is  placed  among  the  books 
that  are  not  authentic.     (P.  G.  41,  892.) 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AT  CLOSE   OF  III.  CENTURY.      337 

The  Canon  of  Amphilochius  is  the  same.  He  defends  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  against  those  who  term  it  apocryphal. 
"  It  is,"  he  says,  "  verily  inspired." 

His  testimony  is  rather  unfavorable  for  the  Apocalypse, 
which  he  says  "  is  judged  apocryphal  by  the  greater  number." 

(P.  G.  37,  1595-X598.) 

The  doubts  of  these  doctors  seem  to  have  regarded  more 
the  authorship  of  the  Apocalypse  than  its  divine  inspiration. 
It  was  an  echo  of  the  opinion  of  Dionysius  the  Great,  who 
called  in  question  not  the  divine  character  of  the  book,  but 
John's  authorship  of  it.  In  fact,  Gregory  of  Nazianzus,  St. 
Basil,  and  Gregory  of  Nyssa  have  employed  the  Apocalypse  as 
divine  Scripture. 

The  Council  of  Laodicea  in  its  sixtieth  Canon  receives  all 
our  books  except  the  Apocalypse  of  John.     (Mansi  II.  573.) 

No  clear  reference  is  found  in  the  works  of  John  Chrysos- 
tom  of  the  II.  and  III.  of  John,  the  II.  of  Peter,  the  Epistle 
of  Jude,  and  the  Apocalypse.  But  this  is  not  an  indication 
that  he  rejected  them.  It  was  due  to  the  minor  doctrinal  im- 
portance of  the  four  Epistles  that  he  found  no  occasion  to 
employ  them,  and  most  probably  the  peculiar  mysterious  char- 
acter of  the  Apocalypse  moved  him  to  seek  his  materials  from 
other  sources. 

His  temper  of  mind  always  favored  the  literal  interpretation 
of  Scripture,  and  there  is  little  in  the  Apocalypse  that  appeals 
to  such  a  mind.  However,  Suidas  in  his  Lexicon,  at  the  word 
VcodvvT)^  declares  that  St.  John  received  the  Apocalypse  as 
canonical. 

In  the  works  of  St.  Ephrem  we  find  commentaries  on  all 
the  books  of  our  Canon  of  the  New  Testament.  He  seems  to 
have  paid  slight  heed  to  the  doubts  of  some  concerning  the 
Apocalypse.  As  St.  Ephrem  knew  not  Greek,  his  use  of  all 
the  books  is  an  evidence  that  they  then  existed  in  Syriac. 

The  testimony  of  the  four  great  Codices  is  favorable  to  the 
Catholic  Canon. 

Codex  5«5>  of  Mt.  Sinai,  contains  all  the  books. 

Codex  B,  of  the  Vatican,  undoubtedly  did  contain  all  the 
books,  but  as  it  is  now  mutilated,  a  portion  of  Hebrews,  the 
Pastoral  Epistles,  and  the  Apocalypse  are  wanting. 

Codex  A,  Alexandrinus,  contains  all  the  books. 

The  palimpsest  Codex  C,  of  St.  Ephrem,  originally  con- 
tained all  the  books.^ 

*  An  accurate  description  of  these  Codices  will  be  given  later  on  in  this 
work. 
V 


338       THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  OF  IV.  CENTURY. 

The  Memphitic  version  of  Scripture  contains  all  the  books 
of  the  Catholic  Canon.  The  Sahidic  version,  also,  though  ex- 
isting now  only  in  fragments,  plainly  shows  that  it  contained 
the  same  Canon. 

The  same  Canon  is  found  in  the  Ethiopian  version,  and  in 
the  Armenian  version.  The  Peschito,  as  it  exists  now  in  the 
Nestorian  Church,  contains  not  II.  Peter,  II.  and  III.  John, 
the  Epistle  of  Jude,  and  the  Apocalypse,  but  it  is  certain  that 
St.  Ephrem  recognized  these  books,  as  frequent  quotations 
from  all  of  them  are  found  in  his  works.  This  gives  us  cause 
to  suspect  that  the  Nestorians,  after  the  time  of  St.  Ephrem, 
expunged  these  books  from  the  Canon  of  Scripture. 

In  the  Western  Church,  as  time  goes  on,  we  find  continued 
evidences  that  the  Catholic  Canon  of  to-day,  was  then  the  prac- 
tical Canon  of  the  Church. 

.  Hilary  of  Poitiers  cites  Hebrews,  and  attributes  it  to 
Paul.  (De  Trin.  IV.  II.)  He  cites  also  II.  Peter  (De  Trin.  I. 
17,)  and  the  Epistle  of  St.  James  (De  Trin.  IV.  8.) 

Lucifer  of  Cagliari,  (fs/i)  cites  the  Epistle  to 
Hebrews,  and  the  Epistle  of  Jude  (De  non  conv.  cum.  Haer.  10, 
ed.  Hartel).* 

St.  Ambrose  (t397)  also  employs  often  in  his  works  the 
Epistle  of  the  Hebrews  and  the  Epistle  of  Jude. 

St.  Philastrius  of  Brescia  (Haeres,  88)  formulates  this 
Canon :  "  It  has  been  establised  by  the  Apostles  and  their 
successors,  that  nothing  should  be  read  in  the  Catholic  Church 
except  the  Law,  the  Prophets,  the  thirteen  Epistles  of  Paul 
and  the  seven  Catholic  Epistles."  The  omission  of  Hebrews 
and  the  Apocalypse  is  due  to  some  shade  of  doubt  that  pos- 
sessed his  mind  at  that  time.  In  other  portions  of  his  works 
he  characterizes  as  heretics  those  who  do  not  receive  the 
Apocalypse  and  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.f 

*Lucifer  was  Bishop  of  Cagliari,  metropolis  of  Sardinia,  about  the 
middle  of  the  fourth  century.  He  vigorously  defended  Athanasius  in  his 
combat  against  Arianism,  and  for  this  was  exiled  by  the  Arian  Emperor,  Con- 
stance. In  his  exile,  he  wrote  his  work  against  Constance,  whereupon  the 
Emperor  sent  him  into  upper  Egypt.  After  the  death  of  Constance,  he  was 
recalled  by  Julian  in  361.  He  went  to  Antioch  where  the  Church  was  rent  by 
the  discussion  between  Paulinus  and  Meletius.  He  consecrated  Paulinus 
bishop  of  the  See  and  thus  augmented  the  schism.  The  saddest  act  in  his 
whole  career  was  his  refusal  to  hold  communion  with  the  Pope  after  his 
restoration  of  the  fathers  of  the  Council  of  Rimini.  He  had  many  followers 
who  took  the  name  of  Luciferans.     He  died  in  371  at  Cagliari. 

f Philaster  was  Bishop  of  Brescia  in  Italy,  about  the  year  374.  He  was 
with  Ambrose  in  the  Council  of  Aquileia  in  381.  His  death  is  placed  about  the 
year  387.  In  his  work  on  heresy  he  reveals  much  piety,  but  there  is  there 
great  lack  of  critique. 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  OF  JEROME.         339 

RUFINUS  OF  Aquileia  (Expos.  Symbol.  37)  has  formulated 
the  complete  Catholic  Canon,  and  terminates  his  list  with 
these  words :  "  These  are  the  books  which  the  Fathers  have 
placed  in  the  Canon,  and  upon  which  they  build  our  faith." 

The  history  of  the  New  Testament  has  this  advantage  over 
that  of  the  Old  Testament,  that  it  has  not  St.  Jerome  as  an 
adversary.  The  works  of  Jerome  are  vast,  and  his  references 
to  the  New  Testament  many.  We  can  only  adduce  here  some 
representative  passages  to  show  forth  what  was  his  mind  on 
our  Canon,  In  his  Epistle  to  Paulinus  (Migne  Patrol.  Lat.  22, 
548)  he  has  the  following  testimony :  "  I  will  touch  briefly 
upon  the  New  Testament,  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke  and  John, 
the  "  quadriga  "  of  the  Lord  and  the  true  Cherubim.  *  ^  * 
Paul  wrote  to  seven  Churches  :  the  eighth  to  the  Hebrews  is 
placed  by  many  outside  the  Canon.  He  exhorts  Timothy  and 
..Titus,  and  entreats  Philemon  for  the  fugitive  slave  Onesimus. 
*  *  *  The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  seem  to  contain  but  dry 
history,  and  to  portray  the  infancy  of  the  Church,  but  when  we 
know  that  the  writer  was  Luke,  the  physician,  'whose  praise 
was  in  the  Gospel,'  we  will  understand  that  all  his  words  are 
medicine  for  a  sick  soul.  James,  Peter,  John,  and  Jude  wrote 
seven  Epistles,  brief  but  deep,  in  mystery,  brief  in  words, 
but  long  in  the  sense,  so  that  many  stumble  in  the  understand- 
ing of  them.  The  Apocalypse  contains  as  many  mysteries  as 
words.     This  is  insufficient  praise  ;  the  book  is  above  all  praise." 

Though  drawn  in  an  oratorical  way  and  somewhat  lacking 
in  precision,  this  list  contains  Jerome's  views  on  the  Canon.  He 
receives  all  the  books,  but  records  the  doubt  concerning  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  We  shall  now  examine  a  few  special 
references  in  the  works  of  Jerome  to  the  books  of  the  New 
Testament,  concerning  which  there  existed  doubt. 

In  his  treatise  de  Viribus  Illustribus  (Migne  Pat.  L.  23,  615) 
Cap.  v.,  he  enumerates  Paul's  Epistles  thus :  **  Paul  wrote 
nine  Epistles  to  seven  churches,  to  the  Romans  one,  to  the 
Corinthians  two,  to  the  Galatians  one,  to  the  Ephesians  one, 
to  the  Philippians  one,  to  the  Colossians  one,  to  the  Thessalo- 
nians  two,  and  besides  two  to  Timothy,  one  to  Titus,  and  one 
to  Philemon.  The  Epistle  which  is  styled  :  To  the  Hebrews, 
is  not  believed  to  be  of  his  authorship,  on  account  of  the  diffe- 
rence in  style  and  diction.  By  Tertullian  it  is  ascribed  to 
Barnabas ;  others  attribute  it  to  Luke  the  Evangelist ;  and 
some  believe  it  to  be  of  Clement  of  Rome,  afterwards  Pope, 
who,  they  say,  was  associated  with  Paul,  and  ordered  and  em- 
bellished Paul's  teaching  in  his  own  language,  or  to  speak  more 


340         THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  OF  JEROME. 

precisely,  since  Paul  wrote  to  the  Hebrews,  and  on  account  of 
their  hatred  of  his  name,  he  omitted  it  in  the  salutation  in  the 
beginning.  He  wrote  as  a  Hebrew  in  Hebrew,  eloquently 
in  his  own  tongue,  and  what  was  eloquently  spoken  in  Hebrew, 
was  more  eloquently  translated  in  Greek,  and  for  this  cause 
the  Epistle  differs  from  the  other  Epistles  of  Paul." 

Jerome  estimated  the  thought  of  the  Eastern  world  above 
that  of  the  West.  The  doubts  concerning  Hebrews  were 
nearly  all  centred  in  the  West,  and  moved  him  little.  Though 
he  is  ready  to  adopt  any  plausible  theory  to  explain  the  ab- 
sence of  the  Pauline  style  in  Hebrews,  he,  in  no  uncertain  terms^ 
vindicates  to  Paul  the  formal  creation  of  the  work.  We  may 
say  in  passing,  that  all  the  discussion  concerning  the  difference 
between  the  style  of  Hebrews  and  the  other  Pauline  Epistles, 
is  chiefly  a  vanity.  It  seems  to  have  originated  in  the  fact, 
that  somebody,  once  upon  a  time,  with  some  display  of  learn- 
ing, claimed  to  have  surpassed  his  fellow  mortals  in  discern- 
ment by  discovering  ^it.  By  the  imitative  instinct  in  man, 
others  followed  him,  till  the  number  became  so  great  that 
men  feared  to  go  against  the  tide.  I  believe  that  if  it  differs 
at  all,  it  is  by  being  more  Pauline  than  the  others.  No  writer 
writes  at  all  times  in  the  same  manner. 

In  his  Epistle  to  Dardanus  (Migne,  22,  1103),  he  is  even 
more  explicit  in  favor  of  the  Hebrews.  "  The  Epistle  which  is 
entitled :  To  the  Hebrews,  is  received  as  the  Epistle  of  Paul, 
not  only  by  all  the  churches  of  the  Orient,  but  also  by  all  the 
Greek  writers  up  to  the  present  time ;  although  many  claim 
that  the  words  were  written  by  Barnabas  or  Clement.  It 
matters  not  who  the  writer  was,  since  he  was  an  ecclesiastical 
man,  and  the  Epistle  is  promulgated  by  the  daily  reading  of 
the  churches.  And  if  the  Latin  usage  does  not  receive  it 
among  the  canonical  Scriptures,  neither  do  the  Greek  churches 
receive  the  Apocalypse  with  full  sanction ;  but  we  receive 
them  both,  following  not  the  usage  of  our  time,  but  the 
authority  of  the  old  writers." 

Jerome  has  exaggerated  the  doubts  of  the  Western  Church 
in  regard  to  Hebrews.  It  was  received  by  that  Church,  and 
the  doubts  were  only  scattering  and  individual.  No  doubt 
had  properly  invaded  the  corporate  belief  of  the  Church.  Je- 
rome rises  above  these  doubts,  and  receives  the  book  on  the 
warrant  of  tradition  and  the  usage  of  the  Church.  Wherever 
he  mentions  elsewhere  in  his  works  these  doubts,  it  is  simply  to 
historically  state  that  which  he  did  not  personally  enter- 
tain. 


THE   CANON   OF   N.   T.    OF   JEROME.  341 

In  his  Commentary  on  Ezechiel,  VIII.  (Migne,  25,  1465), 
he  introduces  a  quotation  from  Hebrews,  with  the  remark : 
"  If,  in  receiving  the  Epistle,  the  Latin  people  does  not  reject 
the  authority  of  the  Greeks."  I  believe  this  to  be  a  rhetorical 
figure  to  belittle  the  importance  of  the  occasional  doubts  of 
the  West.  It  was  equivalent  to  saying:  Against  the  few 
doubts  of  the  West  is  arrayed  the  authority  of  the  whole 
Greek  world. 

Jerome  also  records  a  doubt  which  regarded  not  the  divine 
character,  but  the  authorship  of  II.  Peter.  "  Peter,"  he  says, 
"  wrote  two  Epistles  which  are  called  Catholic.  The  second 
of  these  is  not  believed  to  be  his  by  many,  on  occount  of  its 
difference  from  the  first  in  style."  The  statement  of  Jerome's 
own  views  is  clear  enough,  namely,  that  Peter  wrote  two 
Epistles ;  but  it  was  inexact  to  say  that  many  rejected  the 
second.  The  doubt  of  Peter's  authorship  of  the  Second  Epistle 
only  existed  in  some  Greek  churches,  who  strove  thus  to 
justify  its  omission  from  their  incomplete  Canon. 

In  his  Epistle  to  Hedibia,  (Migne,  22,  1002)  he  sets  at 
naught  this  doubt,  and  ascribes  the  difference  in  style  to  dif- 
ferent amanuenses :  "  The  two  Epistles  ascribed  to  Peter  differ 
in  tenor  and  style,  whence  we  understand  that  he  used  differ- 
ent scribes."  The  opinion  in  itself  is  more  of  a  myth  than  that 
concerning  Hebrews.  The  two  Epistles  are  Peter's,  and 
Petrine. 

In  the  before-mentioned  treatise,  De  Viris  Illustribus,  II. 
(Migne,  P.  L.  23,  607),  Jerome  delivers  the  following  testimony 
concerning  the  Epistle  of  James :  "James,  who  is  called  the 
brother  of  the  Lord,  wrote  one  Epistle  which  is  one  of  the 
seven  Catholic  Epistles.  It  is  said  that  it  was  published  under 
his  name  by  another,  and  that  gradually,  with  the  course 
of  time,  it  acquired  authority."  The  evident  reason 
why  Jerome  does  not  deal  with  the  opinion  which  he 
here  notices  is  that  it  left  intact  the  divine  inspiration  of 
the  book. 

In  op.  cit.  (Migne,  23,  613)  he  makes  a  similar  statement 
respecting  Jude's  Epistle  :  "  Jude,  the  brother  of  James,  left  a 
short  Epistle,  which  is  one  of  the  Catholic  Epistles.  For  the 
reason  that  he  employs  a  testimony  from  the  Apocryphal 
book  of  Henoch,  it  is  rejected  by  many,  but  it  has  merited  au- 
thority by  its  antiquity  and  usage  (in  the  Church),  and  is  reck- 
oned among  the  Holy  Scriptures."  There  is  a  lack  of  precision, 
a  lack  of  critical  weighing  of  data,  in  these  testimonies  that 
has  drawn  from  the  Bollandists  the  just  declaration  :    "  II  con- 


342  CANON  OF  N.  T.  FROM  END  OF  IV.  TO  XV.  CENTURY. 

vient  le  peser  avec  la  defiance  que  doit  inspirer  un  ^crivain 
qui  se  montre  plutot  publiciste  de  talent,  6crivant  au  courant 
de  la  plume  qu'  historien  consciencieux." 

In  the  same  work,  (Migne  P.  L.  23,  623,  637),  Jerome  in- 
serts a  loose  testimony  concerning  the  Epistle  of  St.  John  : 
"  John  ^  *  *  has  written  one  Epistle  which  is  approved 
by  all  the  ecclesiastical  writers  and  learned  men.  The  two 
others  are  attributed  to  John  the  Ancient,  of  whom  they  show 
the  tomb  at  Ephesus,  distinct  from  that  of  the  Apostle, 
although  others  believe  that  both  monuments  belong  to  the 
Evangelist."  As  we  have  said  before,  these  theories  in  the 
mind  of  Jerome  left  intact  the  divinity  of  the  books.  He 
separated  the  authorship  of  the  books  from  their  inspiration. 
He  accepted  their  inspiration  on  the  warrant  of  the  Church  ; 
the  other  question  interested  him  but  little.  He  was 
willing  to  record  every  legend  concerning  it,  and  suspend 
judgment.  Much  of  Jerome's  erudition  is  crude  and  un- 
digested. 

Traces  of  the  last  mentioned  opinion  of  Jerome  are  found 
in  the  Decree  of  Gelasius.  That  decree  contains  all  the 
books  of  the  Catholic  Canon,  although  the  H.and  HI.  of  John 
are  in  some  manuscripts  ascribed  to  John  the  Ancient.  Its 
evidential  force  is  independent  of  this  detail,  for  it  plainly 
receives  all  the  books  as  divine  Scripture. 

The  Canon  of  Pope  Innocent  sent  to  Exuperius  is 
identical  with  the  Canon  of  the  Council  of  Trent. 

We  have  before  adduced  the  Canon  of  St.  Augustine 
(Christian  Doctrine,  Chap.  VIII.)  which  also  is  identical  with 
that  of  the  Council  of  Trent.  He  was  not  ignorant  of  the 
scattering  doubts  in  the  Western  church.  "  The  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,"  he  says  "  has  been  doubted  by  some;  but  I  prefer 
to  follow  the  authority  of  the  Eastern  churches  which  receive 
it  as  canonical."     (Migne,  P.  L.  44,  137). 

The  authority  of  St.  Augustine  is  not  shaken  by  the  least 
shadow  of  doubt.  He  received  all  the  books  as  divinely  in- 
spired Scripture. 

The  three  African  Councils  held  in  393,  397,  and  419,  for- 
mulated a  canon  identical  in  substance  with  that  of  the  Council 
of  Trent. 

In  the  writings  of  representative  men  of  the  churches  of 
Gaul  and  Spain  of  that  period,  we  always  find  evidences  of  the 
complete  Canon.  Thus  we  see  that  at  the  end  of  the  fourth 
century,  all  the  great  churches  of  the  world  possessed  complete 
Canons.     Some  of  the  books  had  entered  into  their   estate 


CANON  OF  N.  T.  FROM  END  OF  IV.  TO  XV.  CENTURY.   343 

easier  than  others,  but  the  energy  of  the  divine  character 
finally  placed  there  those  which,  considered  from  a  doctrinal 
standpoint,  were  unimportant. 

It  is  needless  to  attempt  to  record  the  data  of  the  follow- 
ing centuries  in  favor  of  these  books.  The  whole  Christian 
world  was  unanimous  in  adopting  them.  The  Syriac  Version 
made  in  the  sixth  century  contains  them  all.  The  Council  in 
Trullo  which  is  authority  for  the  Greeks  approved  them  all. 
In  the  West,  the  Bible  of  Cassiodorus  contains  all  the  books. 
The  great  doctors  of  the  Latin  Church  are  unanimous  in  re- 
ceiving the  complete  Canon.  In  fact  the  complete  Canon  enjoy- 
ed a  period  of  undisturbed  peace  up  to  the  fifteenth  century. 

We  have  before  mentioned  the  peculiar  views  on  the  Canon 
held  by  John  of  Salisbury.  His  views  on  the  New  Testament 
are  also  bizarre.  "  The  Epistles  of  Paul,"  he  says,  "  are  fifteen, 
comprised  in  one  volume,  although  the  common  and  almost 
universal  opinion,  is  that  there  are  only  fourteen,  ten  to 
the  churches,  and  four  to  individuals,  if  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  is  to  be  enumerated  with  the  Epistles  of  Paul, 
which  the  doctor  of  doctors,  Jerome,  endeavors  to  prove  in  his 
Preface,  where  he  refutes  the  cavils  of  those  who  contended 
that  it  was  not  of  Paul.  The  fifteenth  is  that  written  to  the 
Church  at  Laodicea,  and  although,  as  Jerome  says,  it  is  rejected 
by  all,  nevertheless  it  was  written  by  the  Apostle.  Neither  is 
this  judgment  founded  on  the  opinion  of  others,  but  rests  on 
the  testimony  of  the  Apostle  who  makes  mention  of  such 
Epistle,  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Colossians." 

The  uncritical  mind  of  Salisbury  failed  to  advert  that  his 
argument  does  not  conclude.  Paul  wrote  a  letter  to  the 
Church  at  Laodicea,  but  that  fact  can  not  be  alleged  to  prove 
that  the  letter  of  which  Salisbury  spoke  was  that  letter  of 
Paul.     Salisbury  had  no  followers,  his  opinion  died  with  him. 

Toward  the  middle  of  the  fifteenth  century  POPE  EUGENE 
IV.,  in  his  Bull  of  Union  with  the  Jacobites,  enumerated  the 
complete  Canon  of  all  our  books  as  the  Holy  Scriptures.  The 
definition  awakened  no  word  of  discussion,  for  it  was  but  pro- 
mulgating in  official  form  what  the  whole  Christian  world 
believed. 

In  the  general  upheaval  of  the  settled  status  of  things, 
which  came  with  the  great  apostasy  of  the  sixteenth  century, 
doubt  and  error  also  invaded  the  thought  of  the  age  concern- 
ing Holy  Scripture. 

In  the  first  edition  of  his  Greek  New  Testament,  which  he 
dedicated  to  Leo  X.,  Erasmus  outlined  certain  doubts  con- 


344  THE    CANON    OF  N.   T.   OF  CAJETAN. 

cerning  the  authorship  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  the 
Epistle  of  St.  James,  II.  Peter,  II.  and  III.  John,  and  the 
Apocalypse.  The  faculty  of  the  Sorbonne  rose  up  against 
him  and  censured  him.  One  must  confess,  however,  that  the 
arguments  of  the  Sorbonne  are  not  conclusive,  and  their  action 
inconsiderate. 

Erasmus  protested  that  he  held  to  the  divinity  of  the 
books ;  he  only  doubted  of  the  authors.  "  There  has  always 
been  doubt,"  he  says,  "  regarding  the  author  of  Hebrews ;  and 
I  confess  candidly  that  I  doubt  yet."  The  faculty  responded 
by  affixing  to  the  opinion  the  note  of  temerity  and  schism. 
Erasmus  appealed  to  history.  "  Doubt  was  entertained  for  a 
long  time,"  he  says,  "  regarding  the  Apocalypse,  not  by  here- 
tics, but  by  orthodox  men,  who,  though  uncertain  of  the  au- 
thor, received  the  book  as  coming  from  the  Holy  Ghost." 
Though  Erasmus  adduces  here  a  fact,  he  does  not  deal  justly 
thereby.  The  mere  fact  that  certain  scattering  doubts  arose 
in  some  churches  concerning  the  author  of  this  book,  was  not 
sufficient  data  to  cast  a  doubt  upon  its  author.  The  Sor- 
bonne  would  have  acted  more  wisely  in  pointing  out  the  weak- 
ness of  the  great  humanist's  position,  than  in  condemning  him 
in  toto  for  that  which  was  more  against  a  sound  critique  than 
against  faith. 

Erasmus  at  length  sent  to  the  faculty  the  following  re- 
sponse, which  does  honor  to  the  man  :  "  According  to  the  mind 
of  man,  I  believe  not  that  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  is  of 
Paul,  or  of  Luke,  nor  that  II.  Peter  is  of  the  Apostle,  nor  the 
Apocalypse  of  John.  *  -5^  ^  Only  this  doubt  holds  my 
mind,  whether  the  Church  receives  the  titles  of  the  books,  so 
that  she  not  only  bids  us  hold  as  infallible  what  is  written  in 
the  books,  but  also  commands  us  to  hold  as  infallible  that  the 
books  came  from  the  authors  whose  names  they  bear.  If  she 
has  canonized  the  titles,  I  renounce  my  doubt.  A  clear  judgment 
of  the  Church  moves  me  more  than  all  the  arguments  of  men." 

Issues  are  mixed  here.  The  Church  has  certainly  canon- 
ized some  titles,  and  some  she  has  not.  But  regarding  the 
books  of  which  Erasmus  spoke,  the  mind  of  the  Church  is  now 
clear,  since  she  mentioned  them  in  the  decree  of  Trent  as  be- 
longing to  their  respective  authors. 

The  most  notable  opposition  to  the  antilegomena  in  this 
period  came  from  Cajetan.* 

♦Thomas  de  Vio  is  sumamed  Cajetanus,  from  the  village  of  Gaeta  or 
Cajeta,  in  the  old  kingdom  of  Naples  where  he  was  bom  on  the  20th  of  Feb- 
ruary, 1469.     At  the  age  of  fifteen,  he  entered  the  Dominican  order.    He 


THE   CANON   OF   N.  T.   OF   CAJETAN.  845 

We  have  before  reviewed  his  position  on  the  deuterocanon- 
ical  books  of  the  Old  Testament.  His  views  on  the  antilego- 
mena  are  focalized  in  the  following  statement :  "  From  these 
and  other  words  of  Jerome,  the  prudent  reader  will  know  that 

studied  theology  at  Bologna,  and  made  brilliant  progress  in  the  sacred 
sciences.  He  took  the  degree  of  doctor  of  theology  in  a  general  assembly  of 
the  order  held  at  Ferrara,  in  1494.  He  taught  theology  for  some  years  at 
Brescia,  Pa  via,  and  at  Rome.  In  1500  he  was  made  procurator  general ;  and 
in  1508,  General  of  the  Order  by  the  express  recommendation  of  Julius  II.  In 
1517  he  was  created  Cardinal  by  Leo  X. .  and  soon  after  was  sent  by  the  Pope 
into  Germany  to  move  the  Emperor  Maximillian  against  the  Turks,  and  to  make 
head  against  Luther.  In  the  latter  project,  he  was  entirely  unsuccessful.  In 
fact  it  seems  unfortunate  that  Cajetan  should  have  been  selected  for  this 
mission.  He  was  but  the  echo  of  the  excessively  elaborate  speculativism  of 
the  scholastics.  It  required  living  thought,  the  comprehension  by  a  master 
mind  of  the  peculiar  causes  that  were  influencing  men's  minds,  to  stop  the 
tide  of  that  dreadful  sea  which  broke  over  Europe  through  the  breach 
made  by  Luther's  defection.  A  man  like  Philip  Neri  would  have  accom- 
plished more  by  his  clear  call  to  the  supernatural,  than  the  subtle  dialec- 
tician. 

In  1519  Cajetan  was  made  Bishop  of  Gaeta.  After  several  other  missions 
in  state  affairs,  in  1523  he  fixed  his  domicile  at  Rome,  and  devoted  his  life  to  the 
study  of  theology  and  the  Holy  Scriptures.  In  dogmatic  theology,  Cajetan 
was  an  absolute  "Thomist" ;  in  Scripture,  an  absolute  "  Jeromist."  This  led 
to  a  sort  of  disdain  for  all  the  resources  of  sacred  science  outside  the  writings 
of  these  alone.  This  led  him  to  enunciate  many  strange  and  dangerous 
opinions,  especially  in  regard  to  the  Scriptures.  There  is  in  his  works  a 
certain  display  of  arrogance  in  the  way  he  essays  to  solve  every  question  by 
his  intellection  of  these  two  doctors. 

In  1527  Rome  was  taken  by  the  army  of  the  Emperor,  and  Cajetan  was 
made  prisoner.  He  regained  his  liberty  only  by  a  ransom  of  fifty  thousand 
Roman  crowns.  The  remaining  years  of  his  life  were  consecrated  to  study 
till  his  death  in  1534. 

Cajetan  is  undoubtedly  the  greatest  commentator  on  the  Summa  Theo. 
logica  of  St.  Thomas.  This  is  also  the  greatest  of  his  works.  He  commented 
all  the  Old  Testament  except  the  Canticle  of  Canticles  and  the  Prophets.  He 
has  a  commentary  on  the  first  three  chapters  of  Isaiah.  He  commented  all 
the  New  Testament  except  the  Apocalypse.  His  method  was  to  bring  out 
the  literal  sense,  and  for  this  cause  he  declared  himself  unable  to  explain  the 
Apocalypse.  Cajetan's  disregard  for  the  Fathers,  Jerome  excepted,  appears 
in  his  statement  that  one  may  hold  that  which  is  not  contrary  to  the  express 
doctrine  of  the  Church,  even  "  against  a  torrent  of  holy  doctors."  (Praef.  in 
Lib.  Moysis.).  It  would  be  better  to  deny  even  the  supposition  of  Cajetan  on 
this  point. 

The  Dominican  Catharinus  moved  the  Sorbonne  to  censure  sixteen  propo- 
sitions taken  from  Cajetan's  commentaries  on  the  Gospels.  After  Cajetan's 
death  the  same  Catharinus  wrote  a  work  filled  with  bitter  criticism  and  severe 
accusations  against  him. 

Melchior  Canus  also  attacks  Cajetan  in  his  celebrated  work  De  Locis 
Theologicis.  He  has  been  defended  by  Sixtus  Sennensis,  and  by  Richard 
Simon.  Though  the  errors  of  Cajetan  were  not  formal,  it  must  be  held  in 
truth  that  his  works  on  Scripture  are  defective  in  many  places,  and  his 
temper  of  mind  is  far  from  laudable. 


346  THE  CANON  OF  N.   T.   OF  COUNCIL   OF   TRENT. 

Jerome  was  not  absolutely  certain  of  the  author  of  this  Epistle, 
and  since  we  have  taken  Jerome  for  our  rule,  lest  we  should 
err  in  the  discernment  of  the  canonical  books,  and  those  which 
he  delivered  to  be  canonical,  we  hold  canonical,  and  those  which 
he  cut  off  from  the  Canon,  we  place  outside  the  Canon  ;  therefore, 
from  the  fact  that  the  author  of  this  Epistle  is  doubtful  with 
Jerome,  the  Epistle  becomes  doubtful,  for  if  it  be  not  of  Paul, 
it  is  not  clear  that  it  is  canonical.  Wherefore,  from  the  author- 
ity of  this  Epistle  alone,  questions  of  faith  cannot  be  decided." 

Regarding  Jude's  Epistle  he  says  :  "  From  which  things 
(the  statements  of  St.  Jerome)  it  appears  that  the  Epistle  is 
inferior  in  authority  to  Holy  Scripture."  He  repeats  in  effect 
this  statement  in  regard  to  H.  and  HI.  John  and  the  Epistle 
of  James.  He  says  naught  of  the  Apocalypse,  but  he  de- 
fended the  canonicity  of  II.  Peter.  In  regard  to  this  Epistle, 
there  was  no  choice  between  authenticity  and  a  literary 
forgery,  for  the  author  claims  to  be  Peter.  (II.  Peter,  I.  i). 
Cajetan  shrank  from  characterizing  a  book,  which  the  Church 
had  used  for  centuries,  as  a  literary  fraud. 

In  examining  the  testimonies  of  Cajetan,  we  find  him  more 
of  a  "Jeromist"  than  Jerome  himself.  Jerome  had  noted 
certain  doubts  regarding  the  antilegomena,  but  he  had  never 
admitted  that  the  books  were  of  doubtful  inspiration.  The 
great  doctor  rightly  separated  the  question  of  authorship  from 
that  of  divinity.  He  incidentally  mentioned  doubts  regarding 
the  former  question,  the  other  question  with  him  was  fixed 
and  sure.  It  is  a  lamentable  lack  of  logic  in  Cajetan's  reason- 
ing to  say,  that  if  the  author  of  a  book  be  uncertain,  the  book 
itself  is  of  inferior  authority.  The  two  questions  were  distinct 
in  Jerome's  time,  and  in  Cajetan's  time. 

The  prerogative  given  to  Jerome  by  Cajetan  in  the  matter 
of  the  Canon  is  absurd.  The  Church,  and  the  Church  alone 
merits  such  authority.  The  whole  testimony  is  like  much  that 
Cajetan  wrote,  an  intense  expression  of  himself.  He  had  a 
perfect  confidence  in  his  heroes  and  himself,  he  cared  little 
for  what  other  men  thought. 

It  is  generally  stated  that  the  opinion  of  Cajetan  was  one 
of  the  disposing  causes,  which  drew  from  the  Church  the  de- 
fined Canon  of  the  Scriptures.  The  protestants  had  already 
set  forth  similar  views  in  Germany.  The  great  credit  of 
Cajetan  would  tend  to  draw  Catholics  towards  the  new 
opinions.  The  juncture  had  come  for  the  Church  to  act,  and 
she  in  her  Decree  of  Trent,  spoke  the  faith  which  she  had  held 
from  the  beginning :     "  The  books  of  the  New  Testament  are 


THE  CANON    OF  N.   T.   OF  COUNCIL  OF  TRENT.  347 

the  four  Gospels,  of  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke  and  John  :  the  Acts 
of  the  Apostles,  written  by  Luke :  the  fourteen  Epistles  of  the 
Apostle  Paul,  viz.,  Romans,  two  to  the  Corinthians,  Galatians, 
Ephesians,  Philippians,  Colossians,  two  to  the  Thessalonians, 
two  to  Timothy,  one  to  Titus,  one  to  Philemon,  and  one  to 
the  Hebrews ;  two  Epistles  of  Peter  the  Apostle,  three 
Epistles  of  John  the  Apostle,  one  of  James  the  Apostle,  one 
of  Jude  the  Apostle,  and  the  Apocalypse  of  John  the  Apostle. 
If  any  man  will  not  receive  as  sacred  and  canonical  all  these 
books  entire,  with  all  their  parts,  as  they  have  been  wont  to  be 
read  in  the  Catholic  Church,  and  as  they  exist  in  the  old  Latin 
Edition  of  the  Vulgate,  *  *  *  '^^  let  him  be  anathema." 
(Council  of  Trent,  Sess.  IV.) 

In  the  Council  of  Trent,  the  discussion  of  the  Canon  of  the 
New  Testament  was  less  extensive  and  intense,  than  that 
which  had  come  upon  the  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament.  Not 
a  voice  opposed  the  canonicity  of  the  antilegomena  of  the  New 
Testament ;  Luther  and  his  supporters  were  recognized  as  their 
sole  opponents. 

Regarding  the  last  verses  of  the  Gospel  of  Mark  ;  Luke's 
account  of  the  sweat  of  the  Lord  in  Gethsemani ;  and  the  sec- 
tion relating  to  the  adulteress  in  the  Gospel  of  John,  some  dis- 
cussion was  moved.  Cardinal  Pacheco  demanded  in  the  gen- 
eral assembly  of  the  Council  on  the  27th  of  March,  that  these 
portions  should  be  expressly  indicated  in  the  decree.  Cajetan 
had  placed  that  the  final  verses  of  Mark  were  of  less  authority 
in  matters  of  faith.     (Mark.  XVI.  9 — 20.) 

The  Fathers  believed  that  it  was  inopportune  to  even  notice 
the  doubts  concerning  these  passages.  The  question  was  put 
to  vote  whether  express  mention  should  be  made  of  these  pas- 
sages, and  it  was  decided  in  the  negative  by  thirty-four  votes 
against  seventeen.  Some  discussion  followed  till  finally  the 
point  raised  by  Pacheco  was  safeguarded  by  the  clause  :  "  the 
books  with  all  their  parish 

The  next  point  of  discussion  regarded  the  authors  of  the  books. 

The  question  was  submitted :  Whether  the  books  should 

be  received  together  with  the  authors.       Forty-four  of  the 

assembly  voted  on  the  ist  of  April,  that  the  authors  should  be 

received  as  well  as  the  books. 

In  consequence  of  this  the  schema  was  modified,  so  that 
the  author  of  every  book  of  the  New  Testament  is  most 
clearly  mentioned  with  the  respective  books.  Hence  the 
question  which  had  been  open  up  to  that  time  was  settled. 
The  Council  fixed  the  canonicity  and  authorship  of  the  books. 


348  THE   NEW  TESTAMENT  OF  THE  SECTS. 

Chapter  XIV. 
The  New  Testament  of  the  Sects. 

The  Canon  of  the  schismatic  Greek  Church,  is  the  same  as 
that  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church. 

In  Syria,  the  Nestorians  receive  only  the  Gospels,  the  Acts, 
fourteen  Epistles  of  Paul,  I.  Peter,  I.  John,  and  the  Epistle  of 
James.  Ebed  Jesu,  the  Nestorian  Metropolitan  of  Nisibe, 
(ti3i8),  does  not  mention  the  four  shorter  Catholic  Epis- 
tles and  Apocalypse  in  his  catalogue  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. 

The  schismatic  Armenians  receive  all  our  books,  and 
add  two  letters  of  the  Corinthians  to  Paul,  and  Paul's 
response. 

The  Ethiopian  Canon  contains  all  the  books,  and  adds  the 
Apostolical  Constitutions. 

Calvin  and  his  sect  received  the  full  Canon. 

The  Anglican  Church  also  received  all  the  books  of  the 
Catholic  Canon. 

In  the  Lutheran  Church  there  was  much  fluctuation  of 
opinion.  Luther  had  doubted  of  the  Epistles  of  James,  Jude, 
Hebrews  and  the  Apocalypse  ;  his  followers  went  farther,  and 
rejected  II.  Peter,  and  II.  and  III.  John.  But  the  Lutherans 
were  not  constant  in  this  opinion.  The  lack  of  support  of  the 
other  sects,  and  the  feebleness  of  their  position  brought  it 
about  that  Bossuet  was  able  to  write  in  1700  to  Leibnitz: 
"  Nous  convenons  tous  ensemble,  protestants  et  catholiques, 
egalement  des  memes  livres  du  Nouveau  Testament ;  car  je  ne 
crois  pas  que  personne  voulut  suivre  encore  les  emportements 
de  Luther  contre  I'Epitre  de  saint  Jacques.  Passons  done  une 
meme  canonicit^  a  tous  ces  livres,  contest6s  autrefois  ou  non 
contest^s :  apr^s  cela.  Monsieur,  permettez-moi  de  vous  de- 
mander  si  vous  voulez  affaiblir  I'autorit^  ou  de  I'Epitre 
aux  H^breux,  si  haute,  si  th^ologique,  si  divine,  ou 
celle  de  1' Apocalypse,  ou  reluit  I'esprit  prophetique 
avec  autant  de  magnificence  que  dans  Isaie  et  dans 
Daniel?" 

The  Lutherans  had  abandoned  their  theory,  but  in  many  of 
of  their  Bibles  the  preface  of  Luther  was  long  after  printed. 
It  is  for  this  cause  that  Richard  Simon  ridicules  them  for  such 
an  apparent  contradiction.  Finally,  these  prefaces  were  ex- 
punged, and  the  opinions  of  their  founder  on  this  point  con- 
signed to  oblivion. 


THE   APOCRYPHA    OF    BOTH  TESTAMENTS.  349 

The  rise  of  rationalism  has  changed  the  estate  of  the  books  of 
both  Testaments  in  the  protestant  church.  It  is  now  no  longer 
a  question  of  the  divinity  of  any  particular  book,  but  belief  in  the 
divinity  of  the  whole  collection  is  fast  dying  in  all  the 
sects. 

Chapter  XV. 

The  Apocryphal   and   lost   books   of   both 
Testaments. 

The  radical  signification  of  apocryphal,  aTro/c/af^o?  from 
aTTOKpvTrreLVy  is  that  of  hidden. 

Cornely  believes  that  the  application  of  the  term  to  scrip- 
tural writings  came  from  the  custom  of  the  Greeks  of  preserv- 
ing the  ccTTOKpvifja  ^tpkCa  in  the  temples  of  the  gods.  These 
books,  they  fabled,  had  come  to  them  from  the  gods ;  hence,  the 
later  imposters,  according  to  his  opinion,  feigned  a  mysterious 
origin  for  their  productions,  which  thus  were  styled  apocryphal. 
His  arguments  to  prove  this  theory  are  very  feeble. 

In  our  judgment  the  first  signification  of  the  term  as  applied 
to  our  books,  was  to  denote  that  the  origin  and  authorship  of 
the  book  were  unknown.  By  its  etymological  force,  it  would 
extend  to  all  books  of  unknown  authorship.  But  language  is 
a  living  growth,  and  can  not  be  bound  by  etymology. 

The  books  which,  though  of  an  uncertain  author,  were  cer- 
tainly of  an  inspired  author,  were  thus  preserved  immune  from 
this  appellation.  So  that  the  term  became  exclusively  applied 
to  books,  whose  real  character  was  hidden. 

At  all  events  the  use  of  the  term  to-day  is  to  signify  a  book 
which  by  its  title  seems  to  lay  claim  to  divinity,  but  which  has 
no  sufficient  data  to  substantiate  this  claim.  Perhaps  we  could 
not  better  the  definition  of  Origen :  "  Books  which  were  pro- 
duced under  the  names  of  the  saints  (biblical  personages),  but 
which  are  outside  the  Canon." 

Not  all  the  Apocrypha  are  of  the  same  character.  Some 
are  impious ;  others  are  composed  of  legends  and  pious  reflec- 
tions intended  for  the  edification  of  the  faithful. 

The  Apocrypha  are  of  two  great  classes,  those  of  the  Old 
Testament,  and  those  of  the  New.  We  know  from  the  testi- 
monies of  the  Fathers  that  a  vast  multitude  of  Apocrypha 
existed  in  the  early  ages  of  the  Church.  The  pious  fictions  of 
Christians,  the  fictions  of  the  Jews,  and  the  forgeries  of  the 
heretics  conspired  to  augment  the  number. 


350  THE  APOCRYPHA  OF  BOTH  TESTAMENTS. 

The  first  official  enumeration  of  the  Apocrypha  is  in  the 
following  Canon  of  Gelasius,  sanctioned  in  a  council  at  Rome 
in  495-496. 

List  of  apocryphal  books  which  are  not  received : 

The  Itinerary  under  name   of  Peter  the  Apostle,  which  is  entitled  of 

Clement,  eight  books,  apocryphal. 
The  Acts  of  Andrew  the  Apostle,  apocryphal. 
The  Acts  of  Thomas  the  Apostle,  apocryphal. 
The  Acts  of  Peter  the  Apostle,  apocryphal. 
The  Acts  of  Philip  the  Apostle,  apocryphal. 
The  Acts  of  Thaddaeus  the  Apostle,  apocryphal. 
The  Grospel  of  Thaddaeus,  apocryphal. 
The  Gospel  of  Mathias,  apocryphal. 
The  Gospel  of  Peter  the  Apostle,  apocryphal. 
The  Gospel  of  James  the  Apostle,  apocryphal. 
The  Gtospel  of  Barnabas,  apocryphal. 

The  Gospel  of  Thomas,  used  by  the  Manicheans,  apocryphal. 
The  Gospel  of  Bartholomew  the  Apostle,  apocryphal. 
The  Gospel  of  Andrew  the  Apostle,  apocryphal. 
The  Gospel  corrupted  by  Lucian,  apocryphal. 
The  Book  of  the  Infancy  of  the  Saviour,  apocryphal. 
The  Gospels  corrupted  by  Hesychius,  apocryphal. 
The  Book  of  the  Navitivity  af  the  Lord  and  Mary  and  the  Wise  Woman, 

apocryphal. 
The  Book  called  Pastor,  apocryphal. 

All  the  books  made  by  Lucius,  the  disciple  of  the  devil,  apocryphal. 
The  Book  called  The  Foundation,  apocryphal. 
The  Book  called  The  Treasure,  apocryphal. 

The  Book  of  the  Daughters  of  Adam,  or  the  Little  Genesis,  apocryphal. 
The  Book  called  the  Acts  of  Thecla  and  Paul,  apocryphal. 
The  Book  called  of  Nepos,  apocryphal. 
The  Book  of  Proverbs,  written  by  heretics,  and  circulated  under  the 

name  of  S.  Sixtus,  apocryphal. 
The  Apocalypse,  which  bears  the  name  of  Paul  the  Apostle,  apocryphal. 
The  Apocalypse  which  bears  the  name  of  Thomas  the  Apostle,  apocryphal. 
The  Apocalypse  which  bears  the  name  of  Stephen  the  Apostle,  apo- 
cryphal. 
The  Book  called  "Transitus",  that  is  the  Assumption  of  the  Blessed 

Virgin  Mary,  apocryphal. 
The  Book  called  the  Penance  of  Adam,  apocryphal. 
The  Book  of  Ogias,  who  is  supposed  by  the  heretics  to  have  combated 

with  the  dragon  after  the  deluge,  apocryphal. 
The  Book  called  the  Testament  of  Job,  apocryphal. 
The  Book  called  the  Penance  of  Origen,  apocryphal. 
The  Book  called  the  Penance  of  St.  Cyprian,  apocryphal. 
The  Book  called  the  Penance  of  Jamne  and  Mambre,  apocryphal. 
The  Book  called  The  Lots  of  the  Holy  Apostles,  apocryphal. 
The  Book  called  The  Praise  of  the  Apostles,  apocryphal. 
The  Book  called  The  Canon  of  the  Apostles,  apocryphal. 
The  Letter  of  Jesus  to  King  Abgar,  apocryphal. 
The  Letter  of  Abgar  to  Jesus,  apocryphal. 
The  Book  called  The  Contradiction  of  Solomon,  apocryphal.    (Mansi. 

Coll.  Cone.  Tom.  VIII. 


THE  APOCRYPHA  OF  BOTH  TESTAMENTS.  351 

A  minor  list  of  apocryphal  books  appears  in  the  works  of 
Nicephorus,  Patriarch  of  Constantinople  (t828). 

Psalms  and  Canticles  of  Solomon,  2100  verses. 

Apocalypse  of  Peter,  300  verses. 

Epistle  of  Barnabas,  1360  verses. 

Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews,  2200  verses. 

Henoch,  4800  verses. 

The  Patriarchs,  5100  verses. 

The  Prayer  of  Joseph,  1100  verses. 

The  Testament  of  Moses,  1100  verses. 

The  Assumption  of  Moses,  1400  verses. 

Abraham,  300  verses. 

Eldad  and  Modad,  400  verses. 

Elias,  the  Prophet,  316  verses. 

Sophonias,  the  Prophet,  600  verses. 

Zachary,  the  father  of  John,  500  verses. 

Baruch,  Habacuc,  Ezechiel,  and  Daniel,  Pseudepigrapha. 

The  Itinerary  of  Peter,  2750  verses. 

The  Itinerary  of  John,  2600  verses. 

The  Itinerary  of  Thomas,  1700  verses. 

The  Gospel  of  Thomas,  1300  verses. 

The  Doctrine  of  the  Apostles,  200  verses. 

The  I.  and  II.  Epistle  of  Clement,  2600  verses. 

Ignatius,  Polycarp,  and  the  Pastor  of  Hermas. — (Opusc.  Hist,  ed.  Boor). 

A  list  of  Apocryphal  books  published  from  different  manu- 
scripts by  Montfaucon,  Cotelier,  Hody  and  Pitra  contains  the 
following : 

Adam.  Apocalypse  of  Ezra. 

Henoch.  History  of  James. 

Lamech.  Apocalypse  of  Peter. 

Patriarchs.  Voyage  and  Doctrine  of  the  Apos- 

Prayer  of  Joseph.  ties. 

Eldad  and  Modad.  Epistle  of  Barnabas. 

Testament  of  Moses.  Acts  of  Paul. 

Assumption  of  Moses.  Apocalypse  of  Paul. 

Psalms  of  Solomon.  Doctrine  of  Clement. 

Apocalypse  of  Elias.  Doctrine  of  Ignatius. 

Vision  of  Elias.  Doctrine  of  Polycarp. 

Vision  of  Isaias.  Grospel  of  Barnabas. 

Apocalypse  of  Sophonias.  Gospel  of  Matthew. 

Apocalypse  of  Zachary. 

(Pitra  Jur.  Eccles.  Graec.  Hist.) 

It  is  not  within  the  scope  of  our  work  to  give  an  extended 
notice  upon  all  these  Apocryphal  books.  We  shall  only  speak 
of  those  of  greater  importance  in  the  bearing  upon  the  Holy 
Scriptures.  We  shall  first  speak  of  those  which  the  Church 
permitted  to  be  printed  outside  the  Canon  in  the  Vulgate. 

Outside  the  Canonical  books  in  the  edition,  of  the  Vulgate, 
are  found  the  third  and  fourth  Books  of  Ezra,  and  the  Prayer 
of  Manasses. 


35^       THE  APOCRYPHA  OF  BOTH  TESTAMENTS. 

The  Third  Book  of  Ezra,  sometimes  called  "  Ezra  Graecus  ", 
is  largely  made  up  of  passages  taken  literally  from  the  Canoni- 
cal I.  Ezra  and  II.  Chronicles.  It  has  only  the  third,  fourth, 
and  six  first  verses  of  the  fifth  chapter  original.  In  many 
codices  of  the  Greek  text,  it  precedes  the  canonical  books  of 
Ezra  and  Nehemias,  which  are  comprised  in  one  volume.  It 
also  occupies  the  same  place  in  the  old  versions  derived  from 
the  Suptuagint. 

Clement  of  Alexandria,  Origen,  Eusebius,  Athanasius,  Basil, 
Chrysostom,  Cyprian,  Ambrose,  Augustine,  and  Prosper  have 
quoted  the  third  and  fourth  chapters,  but  the  quotations  are 
scattering,  and  feeble  in  mode  of  enunciation.  It  gradually 
lost  credit,  till  after  the  fifth  century  it  disappears  in  the  re- 
corded use  of  Scripture  in  the  Church. 

The  book  was  not  absolutely  rejected  by  the  Church  in  the 
Council  of  Trent,  and  she  permits  its  reading.  There  would 
be  no  difficulty  in  approving  its  portions  wherein  it  accords 
with  the  aforesaid  canonical  books,  but  there  are  internal  de- 
fects in  its  original  chapters  in  point  of  doctrine,  which  will 
probably  forever  prevent  it  from  entering  upon  the  estate  of 
canonical  books. 

Though  less  entitled  to  credit  than  the  former,  the  FOURTH 
Book  of  Ezra  had  more  influence  on  early  traditions.  It  was 
upon  the  data  of  this  book  that  the  role  of  Ezra  as  promul- 
gator of  the  Canon  was  founded. 

Up  to  the  eighteenth  century,  the  Greek  text  of  the  book 
was  not  known,  and  the  Latin  text  alone  was  in  the  possession 
of  the  world. 

Since  then  Whiston  published  a  translation  of  the  Arabic 
text  (Primitive  Christianity  Revived,  London,  171 1) ;  Ewald,  in 
1863,  published  the  Arabic  text ;  Lawrence,  in  1820,  published 
the  Ethiopian  text;  Ceriani  published,  in  i860,  a  Latin  trans- 
lation of  the  Syriac  text ;  and  the  Armenian  Bibles  of  Venice, 
1805,  contain  the  Armenian  translation. 

These  show  that  the  Latin  work  has  suffered  mutilations 
and  interpolations.  The  aforesaid  versions  do  not  contain  the 
two  first  and  two  last  chapters  of  the  text  as  found  in  the 
Latin,  and  they  insert  a  long  passage  between  the  thirty-fifth 
and  thirty-sixth  verses  of  the  seventh  chapter.  It  is  evident 
from  the  context,  and  the  references  of  the  Fathers,  that  these 
versions  are  more  in  accord  with  the  original. 

The  original  book  consisted  of  seven  visions,  in  which  the 
last  judgment  is  said  to  impend,  and  men  are  exhorted  to  pre- 
pare for  it.     The  original  work  seems  to  have  been  the  work 


THE  APOCRYPHA  OF  BOTH   TESTAMENTS.  353 

of  a  Jew,  writing  soon  after  the  fall  of  Jerusalem.  The  first 
two  chapters  and  also  the  last  two  are,  doubtless,  the  interpola- 
tion of  a  Christian. 

Aside  from  the  influence  that  the  book  had  in  the  tradi- 
tional role  of  Ezra,  the  only  certain  evidence  that  the  book 
was  known  to  the  Greek  Fathers,  is  in  Strom.  III.  i6,  of 
Clement  of  Alexandria : 

IV.  Ezra  V.  35.  Clem.  Strom.  III.  16. 

"  And  I  said  :  '  Why,  O  Lord  ?  "  '  Why  was  not  the  womb  of 

For  what   was  I  born  ?   or  why      my  mother  my  tomb,  that  I  might 
did  not  the  womb  of  my  mother      not  see  the  affliction  of  Jacob, 
become  my  tomb,  that  I  might      and    the    tribulation   of   Israel,' 
not  see  the  affliction   of  Jacob      saith  Ezra,  the  Prophet." 
and   the   travail  of   my   people, 
Israel ?'  " 

Among  the  Latin  Fathers,  Ambrose  often  quotes  it  as 
Scripture. 

The  Latin  Church  also  has  incorporated  certain  passages 
from  it  into  its  Liturgy. 

Introit  of  Feria  III.  after  Pen- 

IV.  Ezra  II.  37.  tecost. 

"Commendatum    donum    ac-  ''Accipite  jucunditatemgloriae 

cipite  et  jucundamini,  gratias  vestrae,  alleluja ;  gratias  agentes 
agentes  ei,  qui  vos  ad  coelestia  Deo,  alleluja  ;  qui  vos  ad  coeles- 
regna  vocavit."  tia  regna  vocavit." 

In  the  Sixth  Responsorium  in  the  Office  of  the  Apostles,  we  find 
the  following  : 

IV.  Ezra  II.  45. 
"  Hi  sunt  qui  mortalem  tuni-  "  Isti    sunt    triumphatores    et 

cam  deposuerunt,  et  immortalem  amici    Dei.    qui    contemnentes, 

sumpserunt,  et  confess!  sunt  no-  jussa  principum  meruerunt  prae- 

men  Dei ;  Modo  coronantur,  et  mia  aeterna  :    modo,  coronantur 

accipiunt  palmas."  et  accipiunt  palmam." 

Responsorium  IV.  of  Paschal 
IV.    Ezra  IL  35.  Office  of  Martyrs. 

"  Parati    estote     ad     praemia  "  Lux  perpetua  lucebit  Sanctis 

regni,  quia  lux  perpetua  lucebit      tuis,  Domine,  et  aeternitas  tem- 

vobis  per  aeternitatem  temporis. "      porum. " 

These  extrinsic  data  for  the  approbation  of  the  book,  in  no 
wise,  effect  an  argument  in  its  favor.  It  never  entered  into  the 
sacred  literature  of  the  Church.  I  found  only  this  one  refer- 
ence in  Clement's  works,  and  it  is  not  strange  that  he  should 
have  given  some  notice  to  the  book ;  for  he  browsed  on  every 
w 


364  THE  APOCRYPHA  OF  BOTH  TESTAMENTS. 

pasture  where  he  could  feed  his  hunger  for  knowledge.  Am- 
brose is  more  pious  than  critical,  and  the  visions  of  the  pseudo 
Ezra  pleased  him. 

The  reception  of  a  passage  into  Missal  or  Breviary  adds 
but  little  to  its  historical  claim  to  authenticity.  Both  Missal 
and  Breviary  could  very  profitably  be  revised  again.  More- 
over, the  passages  quoted  are  in  themselves  true,  and  well  ex- 
pressed,  and  appropriate  to  the  theme  for  which  used. 

Although  the  book  is  not  absolutely  condemned  by  the 
Church,  it  is  certainly  not  of  divine  origin.  In  fact,  it  is  not 
free  from  doctrinal  errors  regarding  the  state  of  the  souls  after 
death,  and  contains  many  rabbinic  fables. 

We  know  upon  the  authority  of  II.  Chronicles  XXXIII.  12, 
18,  that  Menasseh,  son  of  Ezechias,  when  a  captive  in  Babylon 
in  punishment  for  his  sins,  was  moved  to  penance,  and  prayed 
to  God.  But  we  have  no  means  of  knowing  whether  the 
prayer  of  Menasseh  of  the  Latin  Vulgate,  be  that  authentic 
prayer.  There  is  very  little  in  its  favor;  the  work  is  unim- 
portant, and  it  probably  will  always  remain  one  of  the  unset- 
tled points  of  history. 

In  editions  of  the  Greek  text  of  the  Old  Testament,  we  find 
the  CLI.  Psalm  attributed  to  David.  St.  Athanasius  (Epist.  ad 
Marcell.  15)  and  Euthemius  (In  Ps.  Proem.)  regarded  it  as 
authentic.  The  import  of  the  Psalm  is  to  celebrate  David's 
victory  over  Goliath.  It  was  never  received  in  the  Latin  ver- 
sion, but  it  has  place  in  the  Ethiopian,  Armenian,  Syriac,  and 
Arabic.  It  is  not  lacking  in  grace  of  thought  and  diction,  but 
no  good  authority  warrants  its  inspiration. 

In  some  good  codices  of  the  Septuagint,  Eighteen  Psalms 
are  found  entitled  "^aXfiol  koI  u>ha\  ^a\o^a.vTO<i.  They  were 
unknown  in  the  West,  till  De  laCerda  in  1626,  published  them 
from  a  Codex  of  Constantinople,  which  had  been  brought  into 
Germany.  The  burden  of  the  Psalms  is  the  fallen  estate  of 
Israel,  and  the  cry  for  the  Messiah.  It  is  evident  that  the 
original  was  Hebrew  or  Aramaic.  As  it  is  natural  for  parents  to 
love  their  children,  De  la  Cerda  stoutly  advocated  the  cause 
of  his  work,  claiming  that  these  Psalms  were  either  of  Solomon 
or  some  one  who,  with  pious  intent,  wrote  in  Solomon's  name. 
But  the  very  nature  of  the  argument  precludes  the  authorship 
of  Solomon.  Under  him  Israel,  reached  the  zenith  of  her 
glory.  They  were  probably  written  by  some  Jew,  after  Israel 
had  begun  to  suffer  the  subjugation  of  foreign  foes. 

In  the  Alexandrian,  Sinaitic,  and  other  good  codices,  there 
is  found  a  work  which  is  known  as  the  Third  Book  of  Macca- 


THE  APOCRYPHA  OF  BOTH  TESTAMENTS.  355 

bees.  It  narrates  a  persecution  of  the  Alexandrine  Jews  by 
Ptolemy  IV.,  Philopator.  Other  history  is  silent  concerning 
this  persecution.  The  book  is  in  no  way  connected  with  the 
Maccabees  or  their  history,  and  seems  to  have  acquired  its 
name  from  its  position  immediately  after  the  books  of  Mac- 
cabees. The  Eighty-fifth  Canon  of  the  Apostles  enumerates 
it  among  the  canonical  books,  and  it  finds  an  occasional  men- 
tion from  some  anonymous  or  obscure  Greek  writer,  but  it  is 
but  little  known  in  the  West,  and  never  found  its  way  into  a 
Latin  codex.     Its  apocryphal  character  is  an  assured  fact. 

The  Fourth  Book  of  Maccabees  is  a  sort  of  essay  to  prove 
that  reason  should  rule  the  movements  of  the  soul.  It 
appeals  to  the  history  of  Eleazar,  and  the  seven  martyr  sons  of 
the  woman  mentioned  in  II.  Maccabees.  It  is  evident  from  a 
marked  similarity  that  the  author  used  the  second  book  of 
Maccabees  in  the  construction  of  his  work.  Eusebius,  Jerome, 
and  Philostorgius  attribute  the  work  to  Flavius  Josephus. 
The  book  obtained  some  slight  recognition  from  Gregory 
Nanz.  and  Ambrose,  but  there  is  nothing  either  extrinsic  or 
intrinsic  to  found  its  divinity.  In  fact,  it  seems  to  favor  the 
errors  of  the  Stoics  and  other  errors,  and  is  placed  as  apocry- 
phal by  all. 

We  mention  now  in  the  second  class,  the  apocryphal  books 
to  which  allusions  are  said  by  some  to  be  found  in  the  New 
Testament.   The  most  notable  of  these  is  the  Book  of  Henoch. 

In  Gen.  V.  24,  it  is  said  of  Henoch  that  he  walked  with  God. 
This  expression  was  interpreted  to  mean  not  only  that  he  led 
a  godly  life,  but  also  that  he  had  been  vouchsafed  the 
privilege  of  divine  intercourse,  and  of  receiving  divine  revela- 
tions. Jewish  antiquity  regarded  him  therefore  as  a  prophet, 
equally  familiar  with  heavenly  things  and  the  future  fortunes 
of  the  human  race.  These  views  of  his  character  gave  occa- 
sion for  attributing  to  Henoch  the  apocryphal  writing  which 
constitutes  one  of  the  principal  monuments  of  the  apocalyptic 
literature  of  later  Judaism.  This  Book  of  Henoch  was  much 
used  by  Jewish  and  Christian  writers  in  the  following  centuries, 
but  was  subsequently  almost  entirely  lost — a  few  fragments 
only  having  been  preserved  in  the  chronography  of  Georgios 
Synkellos — till  re-discovered  in  the  last  century  in  an  Ethiopic 
translation.  James  Bruce,  in  1773,  brought  back  two  MSS. 
into  Europe,  to  which  some  others  have  been  subsequently 
added.  Silvestre  de  Sacy  was  the  first  to  publish,  in  1800, 
some  particulars  concerning  the  contents  of  this  writing. 
{Magasin    Encyclop.   VI.    I.    382    seqq,).         Lawrence     was 


366  THE   APOCRYPHA   OF   BOTH   TESTAMENTS. 

the  first  to  edit  an  English  translation  {The  Book  of  Enoch, 
an  Apocryphal  Production,  &c.,  Oxford,  1821,  2d  ed.  1833,  3rd 
ed.  1838),  followed  by  the  original  Ethiopic  text  from  Bruce's 
vci2Xi\xs>zx'v^\.s  {Libri  Enoch  Versio  Aethiopica,  Oyiiord,  1838).  A 
German  translation,  with  learned  introduction  and  continuous 
commentary,  was  published  by  Prof.  A.  G.  Hoffmann  in  Jena 
{Das  Buch  Henoch  in  vollstdndiger  deutscher  Uebersetzung,  &c., 
2  Theile,  Leipzig,  1833-1838).  The  first  part  is  translated  from 
the  English,  but  the  second  is  based  likewise  on  the  Frankfort 
manuscript  of  the  Ethiopic  text.  The  Latin  version  of  Gfrorer, 
made  from  the  English  and  German  translations,  is  of  no  value 
{Prophetae  veteres  pseudepigraphi,  Stuttgart,  1840).  The  best 
edition  of  the  Ethiopic  text  is  that  of  Dillmann,  who  made 
use  of  five  manuscripts  {Liber  Henoch  Aethiopice,  Leipzig, 
185 1).  Of  the  improved  text  thus  obtained,  Dillmann  pub- 
lished another  German  translation  with  critical  introduction 
and  copious  commentary  {Das  Buch  Henoch  ubersetzt  und 
erkldrt,  Leipzig,  1853).  The  Ethiopic  version  was  not  made 
immediately  from  the  Hebrew  original,  but  from  the  Greek. 
There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  its  substantial  fidelity,  though  it 
not  unfrequently  differs  from  the  Greek  text  of  fragments  pre- 
served elsewhere,  one  at  least  of  which  is  not  to  be  found  in 
the  Ethiopic  text.  The  whole  work  as  it  now  lies  before  us,  is 
divided  into  five  books,  but  closer  investigation  makes  it  evi- 
dent that  this  text  has  passed  through  various  hands,  and  is  a 
composite  work.  It  has  been  assumed  by  various  critics  that 
we  have  before  us  a  collection  of  several  books  of  Enoch  inde- 
pendent one  of  another.  This  hypothesis,  however,  is  unten- 
able ;  we  must,  on  the  contrary,  assume  the  existence  of  an 
original  document,  which  at  different  times  was  enriched  with 
additions  from  various  sources.  The  critical  treatment  of  the 
book  has  occupied,  besides  de  Sacy,  Lawrence,  and  Hoffmann, 
the  following  scholars,  whose  labors  deserve  a  special  mention 
here  :  Ernst  Krieger  [Liitzelberger]  (in  the  Beitrdge  zur  Kritik 
und  Exegese,  Niirnberg,  1845),  Liicke  {Einleitung  in  die  Offen- 
barung  Johannis,  2d  ed.  Bonn,  1852),  Dillmann  (as  above), 
Ewald  {Ueber  des  Aethiopischen  Buches  Henoch  Entstchung  und 
Zusammensetzung),  K.  R.  Kostlin  ("  Ueber  die  Entstehung  des 
Buches  Henoch,''  Theologische  Jahrbiicher  von  Baur  und  Zeller, 
Jahrgang,  1856),  and  Hilgenfeld  {Judische  Apokalyptik,  Jena, 
1857;  Zeitschrift  fur  wissenschaftliche  Theologie,  i860,  p.  319 
seqq.,  1861,  p.  212  seqq.,  1862,  p.  216  seqq.). 

Excluding  first  the  so-called  Parables  (cc.  37-71),  the  fol- 
lowing chapters — 1-19,  21-36,  72-105 — form  a  well-connected 


THE  APOCRYPHA   OF   BOTH   TESTAMENTS.  357 

whole,  which  professes  to  be  a  variety  of  revelations  committed 
to  writing  which  had  been  vouchsafed  to  the  prophet  Henoch, 
partly  in  ecstatic  visions  in  the  heavenly  world,  partly  in  pro- 
phetic dreams.  The  introduction  (cc.  1-5)  announces  first  a 
benediction  of  the  prophet  on  the  righteous,  and  then  a 
prophecy  of  the  great  day  of  judgment,  on  which  the  impious 
will  receive  well-merited  punishment  for  their  disobedience  to 
the  ordinances  of  God.  Whereupon  follows  (cc.  6-16)  an  ac- 
count of  the  origin  of  the  universal  corruption  of  the  human 
race,  induced  by  the  fall  of  the  angels  and  their  carnal  inter- 
course with  the  daughters  of  men.  In  consequence  of  the 
abominations  resulting  from  this  fall,  God  is  about  to  impose  a 
heavy  judgment,  which  Henoch  has  to  announce  to  the  fallen 
"Watchers."  These  are  to  be  in  future  bound  in  subterranean 
prisons  for  the  whole  period  of  earth's  history,  the  duration  of 
which  is  fixed  at  seventy  generations,  until  the  day  of  final 
judgment,  whereon  they  will  be  cast  forever  into  the  lake  of 
fire.  In  what  follows,  the  original  text  appears  in  a  somewhat 
fragmentary  form  in  the  Ethiopic  version.  As  in  the  intro- 
duction, a  reference  to  the  fixed  divine  laws  which  heaven 
itself  and  the  whole  physical  universe  have  to  obey  served  to 
exhibit  in  the  strongest  light  the  guilt  of  sinners  in  transgress- 
ing the  will  of  God,  so  now  is  made  to  follow  (cc.  17-19,  21-36) 
an  account  of  the  mysteries  of  heaven  and  earth,  which  have 
been  exhibited  to  Henoch  by  angels  during  an  ecstatic  rapture 
from  earth  to  heaven.  In  this  miraculous  journey  round  the 
universe  Henoch  sees  first  the  place  of  the  winds  and  the  regions 
whence  lightning  and  thunder  come.  After  that  the  water  of 
life,  and  the  sea  of  fire  which  is  destined  to  receive  the  setting 
sun,  the  streams  of  Hades,  the  dwelling-place  of  the  dead,  the 
mountains  of  black  winter  clouds,  the  waters  of  Oceanus,  the 
winds  which  support  the  universe,  seven  fiery  mountains  of 
precious  stones,  the  mid-one  of  which,  being  the  throne  of 
God,  reaches  to  heaven,  the  hell  of  fire,  and  in  the  vacant 
spaces  of  the  universe  the  prison-houses  of  fallen  star-spirits, 
and  the  future  place  of  punishment  for  the  angels  who  had 
held  sinful  intercourse  with  the  daughters  of  men.  In  a  sub- 
sequent journey  Henoch  is  taken  a  second  time  to  the  same 
places.  First  to  the  place  of  punishment  for  the  fallen  angels  ; 
then  into  Hades  and  its  different  compartments ;  to  the  fire  at 
which  the  stars  are  kindled  ;  to  the  place  of  future  judgment ; 
to  the  seven  mountains,  the  middle  one  of  which  rises  in  the 
form  of  a  throne  ;  and  then  into  the  Holy  Land  and  the  vale 
of  Hinnom,  the  future  place  of  punishment  for  impious  men  ; 


358  THE   APOCRYPHA  OF  BOTH   TESTAMENTS. 

and  then  further  eastward  to  the  legendary  home-lands  of  noble 
spices,  and  on  as  far  as  Paradise.  In  a  third  journey  Henoch 
arrives  at  the  gates  of  Heaven,  and  the  places  whence  issue 
stars  and  winds.  Thereupon  follows  (cc.  72-82)  the  book  con- 
cerning the  courses  of  the  heavenly  lights,  which  describes 
once  more  in  the  form  of  a  journey  the  movements  and  orders 
of  stars  and  constellations,  the  courses  of  sun  and  moon,  and 
the  relation  of  the  solar  to  the  lunar  year,  to  which  are  attached 
a  series  of  further  communications  regarding  the  various  winds, 
their  origin  and  operations,  concerning  the  seven  mountains, 
seven  streams,  and  seven  islands.  The  laws  of  the  lights  and 
powers  of  heaven  are  announced  to  Henoch  on  his  journeys  by 
the  instrumentality  of  angels.  All  this  he  imparts  to  his  son 
Methuselah,  who  is  to  commit  it  in  his  turn  to  following  gen- 
erations. In  some  parts  of  this  section  the  original  order 
seems  to  have  been  disturbed.  Chapter  82  ought  properly  to 
stand  before  chapter  79,  while  chapter  81  forms  the  conclusion 
of  this  section.  Henoch  in  this  chapter  contemplates  the  writ- 
ing on  the  heavenly  tables,  wherein  are  recorded  the  actions  of 
men  to  the  latest  generations,  and  then  returns  from  his  jour- 
neys to  earth,  in  order  to  spend  one  last  year  in  the  circle  of 
his  family. 

The  revelations  which  follow  concerning  the  future  fortunes 
of  mankind  (cc.  83-91,  11  ;  93  ;  91,  12-19)  ^^e  presented  in  the 
form  of  visions  which  Henoch,  hasbeen  vouchsafed  at  different 
times  of  his  life,  but  which  he  now,  for  the  first  time,  on  the 
conclusion  of  his  wondrous  journey,  relates  to  his  son  Methu- 
selah. 

The  first  vision,  seen  by  him  while  still  a  boy,  in  the  house 
of  his  grandfather  Mahalaleel,  describes  the  flood  (c.  83) ;  the 
second,  which  had  been  imparted  to  him  before  his  marriage, 
gives  in  apocalyptic  figures  a  general  survey  of  the  history  of 
the  chosen  people,  from  the  first  human  pair  to  the  struggles 
of  the  Israelites  against  the  Syrians,  in  the  time  of  John  Hyr- 
canus.  The  account  of  these  struggles  is  immediately  followed 
by  that  of  the  approaching  universal  judgment  (cc.  64-90).  A 
third  description  of  the  future,  introduced  by  exhortations  to 
his  children,  gives  once  more  a  rapid  survey  of  the  world's  his- 
tory divided  into  ten  great  weeks.  At  the  end  of  the  seventh 
week,  which  is  the  actual  writer's  own  time,  the  righteous  re- 
ceive a  sevenfold  instruction  concerning  the  whole  creation  ; 
in  the  eighth  week  the  righteous  celebrate  their  triumph  and 
enter  on  their  kingdom;  in  the  ninth,  judgment  is  passed  on 
the  ungodly;   to  the  tenth  is  assigned  the  judgment   of  the 


THE  APOCRYPHA  OF  BOTH  TESTAMENTS.  369 

fallen  angels  and  the  renewal  of  heaven  and  earth.  The  last 
section  (cc,  92  ;  94-105)  contains  the  Doctrines  of  Wisdom 
which  Henoch  the  writer  imparts  to  his  children  and  all  future 
generations,  warnings  against  sin  in  its  various  forms,  admoni- 
tions to  righteousness,  fidelity,  and  perseverance,  comminations 
against  the  ungodly,  and  promises  for  the  righteous. 

The  text  of  this  comprehensive  work  appears  in  some  parts 
not  to  belong  to  the  original  form.  Apart  from  the  lacuna  be- 
tween chapters  16  and  17,  and  some  smaller  interpolations  of 
which  we  shall  have  to  speak  farther  on,  it  strikes  one  with 
surprise  to  find  several  things  seen  by  Henoch  in  his  journeys 
repeatedly  told  again  in  the  same  words.  The  revelations, 
moreover,  vouchsafed  to  Henoch  on  his  first  journey  (cc.  17-19) 
are  for  the  most  part  repeated,  chapters  21-36.  The  section 
about  the  Winds,  on  the  other  hand,  chapters  ^6  and  JT, 
together  with  the  addition  about  the  Seven  Mountains,  &c., 
disturbs  too  much  the  connection  of  the  book  about  the  Lights 
of  Heaven.  It  repeats,  also,  in  more  detail,  what  has  already 
been  treated  of  (chapters  33-36),  only  much  more  briefly. 

As  there  is  little  probability  that  these  repetitions  were  in- 
tentional, we  are  warranted  in  supposing  that  there  may  have 
been  different  recensions  of  the  text,  which  held  their  ground 
side  by  side,  and  were  put  together  by  some  simple-minded 
collector. 

The  book,  in  any  case,  remains  a  remarkable  monument  of 
Jewish  theological  opinion,  at  the  close  of  the  first  and 
beginning  of  the  second  century  before  Christ. 

The  result  of  these  observations  seems  to  be  that  the  Book 
of  Henoch  must  be  regarded  as  a  collective  work,  consisting  of 
various  parts,  about  the  composition  of  which  it  will  be  dififi. 
cult  to  form  a  certain  judgment  until  the  Hebrew  original,  or 
at  any  rate  the  Greek  version  from  which  the  Ethiopic  is  de- 
rived, shall  have  been  recovered. — (Diet,  of  Christ.  Biog.  of 
Smith  &  Wace.) 

The  Book  of  Henoch  acquired  much  of  its  fame  from  a 
supposed  reference  made  to  it  by  Jude  in  his  Epistle,  V.  14: 
"  Prophetavit  autem  et  de  his  septimus  ab  Adam  Henoch 
dicens  :  *  Ecce  venit  Dominus  in  Sanctis  millibus  suis.'  "  The 
words  of  the  Book  of  Henoch  are  :  "  Et  ecce  venit  cum  decem 
millibus  sanctorum,  ut  judicium  exerceat  de  iis  et  disjiciat  im- 
probos,  etc." 

Moved  especially  by  this  passage  of  Jude,  Tertullian  was 
much  inclined  to  receive  the  book.  His  words,  however,  show 
that  he  was  conscious  that  tradition  was  not  with  him.     The 


360     THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AND  THE  APOCRYPHA. 

joint  basis  of  Catholic  faith  in  tradition  does  not  consist  of  the 
stray  voices  of  men,  who,  through  the  frailty  of  human  reason, 
at  times  lapsed  into  unsupported  vagaries.  No  man  representing 
the  Christian  thought  of  the  time,  ever  said  that  the  Book  of 
Henoch  was  divine.    Augustineand  Jeromeforciblyrepudiate  it. 

It  was  conceded  by  those  two  Fathers  and  by  many  others 
that  the  Apostle  Jude  quoted  this  book  in  his  Epistle.  The 
Fathers  argue  that  such  use  of  the  book  did  not  necessarily 
canonize  the  book.  Provided  the  Apocryphal  book  did,  in  the 
referred  passage,  contain  a  real  statement  by  Henoch,  I  am  not 
disposed  to  either  affirm  or  deny  this  position.  But  there  is 
no  sufficient  evidence  for  the  application  of  such  theory  to  the 
matter  in  question.  It  is  far  more  probable  that  both  the 
reference  of  Jude  and  the  apocryphal  book  are  based  upon 
some  common  traditional  or  documentary  data,  available  in 
that  early  age,  or  perhaps  the  apocryphal  book  took  its  passage 
from  the  Epistle  of  Jude,  since  much  moves  us  to  ascribe  to  the 
book  a  later  origin  than  the  date  of  the  Epistle.  In  fact  the 
passage  in  the  Ethiopian  exemplar  seems  like  an  interpolation, 
being  not  in  harmony  with  the  context. 

All  things  considered,  we  must  conclude  that  the  book  is 
evidently  a  spurious  product  of  unknown  causes. 

The  Assumption  of  Moses  according  to  Origen,  Didy- 
mus,  and  Oecumenius  is  cited  by  St.  Jude,  I.  9,  (Orig,  De 
Prin.  III.  2;  Didym.  et  Oecum.  in  Epist.  Jud.).  It  is  men- 
tioned by  Clement  of  Alexandria  and  others.  The  original 
which  seems  to  have  been  Aramaic  Hebrew,  is  lost,  as  also  the 
Greek  translation.  All  that  is  preserved  to  us  is  a  fragment 
of  the  Latin  translation,  found  by  Ceriani  in  a  Palimpsest  of 
the  Ambrosian  Library,  and  published  by  him  in  his  Monu- 
menta  Sacra  in  1861. 

The  book  represents  Moses,  on  the  point  of  leaving  his 
people,  conversing  with  Joshua,  and  revealing  to  him  the 
future  destiny  of  the  chosen  people  ;  their  establishment  in  the 
promised  land,  the  overthrow  of  Jerusalem  and  the  Temple, 
the  Babylonian  captivity,  the  restoration  and  second  temple ; 
the  sins  of  the  Jews  in  the  latter  times,  and  their  chastisement 
by  a  foreigner.  The  theme  is  weird  and  desolate.  It  seems  to 
be  the  plaint  of  a  Jew  of  the  time  of  Herod,  bewailing  the 
decadence  of  his  people. 

There  is  no  foundation  for  the  opinion  that  Jude  cited  this 
book.  Certain  data  respecting  the  death  of  Moses  existed 
with  the  Jews,  and  these  formed  the  common  source  from 
which  both  authors  drew. 


THE   CANON   OF    N.   T.   AND   THE   APOCRYPHA.  361 

The  Apocalypse  of  Moses  is  a  small  book  published  for 
the  first  by  Tischendorf,  in  Greek,  in  1866.  The  work  is  a 
Jewish  romance  of  the  fifth  century.  It  is  unimportant,  and 
almost  unknown  to  the  older  writers.  Certain  later  Greek 
writers  have  tried  to  find  in  it  one  of  the  sources  of  Paul's 
Epistle  to  the  Galatians  (Gal.  V.  6;  VI.  15).  If  there  be  any 
resemblance  between  the  two  documents,  it  must  have  resulted 
from  the  use  which  the  author  of  the  spurious  document  made 
of  Paul's  Epistle. 

In  1 8 19  Lawrence  published  the  Ethiopian  text  of  the 
Ascension  of  Isaiah.  In  1828  Card.  Mai  discovered  and 
published  two  fragments  of  an  ancient  Latin  version  of  the 
same  work.  A  third  Latin  fragment  was  brought  out  in  1878 
by  Gebhardt.  According  to  Dillman,  who  translated  into  Latin 
the  text  of  Lawrence,  the  work  is  of  a  composite  character. 
I. — An  account  of  the  martyrdom  of  Isaiah,  dating  from 
end  of  the  first  century  and  known  to  Justin,  TertuUian, 
Origen  and  Ambrose.  2. — The  Ascension  of  Isaiah.  This 
document  narrates  that  in  the  seventh  year  of  the  reign  of 
Ezechias,  Isaiah  is  rapt  to  the  heavens  by  an  angel.  He 
traverses  successively  the  six  circles,  and  comes  to  the  seventh 
heaven  to  the  throne  of  God,  where  the  Trinity  reveals  itself 
to  him,  and  the  mystery  of  the  Incarnation  is  made  known  to 
him.  This  part  is  of  Gnostic  origin,  dating  from  about  the 
beginning  of  the  second  century.  3. — These  two  works  were 
joined  by  some  later  Christian,  and  finally  the  work  received  a 
later  interpolation. 

St.  Jerome  narrates  (in  Is.  64,  4)  that  some  derived  what 
Paul  writes,  I.  Cor.  II.  9,  from  this  apocryphal  book,  while 
others  derive  them  from  the  APOCALYPSE  OF  Elias.  Origen 
conjectured  that  Math.  XXVII.  9,  was  derived  from  an  apocry- 
phal book  of  Jeremias.  Both  these  works  and  these  opinions 
are  unimportant,  and  have  no  influence  on  Christian  thought, 
and  we  turn  to  more  important  things. 

Chief  among  the  apocryphal  books  of  the  New  Testament 
are  the  Letter  of  Abgar,  King  of  Osrhoene,  to  Jesus  Christ, 
and  Jesus'  response.  The  two  documents,  as  preserved  for  us 
by  Eusebius,  are  as  follows  : 

"Copy  of  the  Letter  Written  by  King  Agbarus  to 

Jesus,  and  Sent  to  Him,  at  Jerusalem, 

BY  Ananias,  the  Courier. 

'Agbarus,  prince  of  Edessa,  sends  greeting  to  Jesus,  the 
excellent  Saviour,  who  has  appeared  in  the  borders  of  Jeru- 


362     THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AND  THE  APOCRYPHA. 

salem.  I  have  heard  the  reports  respecting  thee  and  thy 
cures,  as  performed  by  thee  without  medicines  and  without 
the  use  of  herbs.  For  as  it  is  said,  thou  causest  the  blind  to 
see  again,  the  lame  to  walk,  and  thou  cleansest  the  lepers,  and 
thou  castest  out  impure  spirits  and  demons,  and  thou  healest 
those  that  are  tormented  by  long  disease,  and  thou  raisest  the 
dead.  And  hearing  all  these  things  of  thee,  I  concluded  in  my 
mind  one  of  two  things  :  either  that  thou  art  God,  and  having 
descended  from  heaven,  doest  these  these  things,  or  else  doing 
them,  thou  art  the  son  of  God.  Therefore,  now  I  have  written 
and  besought  thee  to  visit  me,  and  to  heal  the  disease  with 
which  I  am  afHicted.  I  have,  also,  heard  that  the  Jews 
murmur  against  thee,  and  are  plotting  to  injure  thee ;  I  have, 
however,  a  very  small  but  noble  state,  which  is  sufficient  for 
us  both.' 

This  epistle,  he  thus  wrote,  whilst  yet  somewhat  enlight- 
ened by  the  rays  of  divine  truth.  It  is,  also,  worth  the  time 
to  learn  the  epistle  sent  to  him  from  Jesus,  by  the  same 
bearer,  which,  though  very  brief,  is  yet  very  nervous,  written 
in  the  following  style  : 

The  Answer  of  Jesus  to  King  Agbarus,  by  the  Courier, 

Ananias. 

'  Blessed  art  thou,  O  Agbarus,  who,  without  seeing,  hast 
believed  in  me.  For  it  is  written  concerning  me,  that  they 
who  have  seen  me  will  not  believe,  that  they  who  have  not 
seen,  may  believe  and  live.  But  in  regard  to  what  thou  hast 
written,  that  I  should  come  to  thee,  it  is  necessary  that  I 
should  fulfill  all  things  here,  for  which  I  have  been  sent.  And 
after  this  fulfillment,  thus  to  be  received  again  by  Him  that 
sent  me.  And  after  I  have  been  received  up,  I  will  send  to 
thee  a  certain  one  of  my  disciples,  that  he  may  heal  thy  afflic- 
tion, and  give  life  to  thee  and  to  those  who  are  with  thee.'  " 

The  continuation  of  the  account  in  Eusebius  narrates  that 
after  the  resurrection  of  Jesus,  Thaddeus  the  Apostle,  went  to 
the  king,  healed  him  of  his  infirmity  and  converted  his  people. 
The  celebrated  historian  of  Armenia,  Moses  of  Khorene, 
testifies  to  the  substantial  facts  of  Eusebius'  account. 

Several  other  accounts  of  the  legend  are  in  existence,  some 
of  them  containing  additional  data.  According  to  Moses  of 
Khorene,  the  ambassador  sent  to  Jesus  by  Abgar,  brought  back 
a  portrait  of  the  Lord  which  was  venerated  at  Edessa  up  to 
the  fifth  century.  The  Syriac  account  of  the  correspondence 
affirms  that  the  answer  of  Jesus  was  not  by  writing,  but  by 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AND  THE  APOCRYPHA.     363 

oral  declaration  delivered  to  the  ambassador  of  the  king.  The 
whole  legend  appears  in  the  celebrated  Doctrine  of  Addai.  It 
is,  of  course,  legendary,  a  curious  monument  of  Oriental  litera- 
ture. It  is,  as  we  have  seen,  declared  apocryphal  in  the  decree 
of  Gelasius,  De  Recipiendis  Libris  (Migne,  Patrol.  Lat.  59,  164). 

St.  Ephrem  fully  believed  in  the  authenticity  of  the  recital, 
and  Baronius  declared  that  the  recital  was  worthy  of  a  certain 
veneration,  but  a  critical  examination  of  the  history  reveals  a 
certain  element  of  the  impossible  and  the  incredible,  which 
plainly  stamps  it  as  fiction. 

Fabricius,  in  his  Codex  Apocryphus  Novi  Testamenti, 
Tom.  I.  p.  843  et  seqq.,  exhibits  three  letters  of  the  Blessed 
Virgin  Mary.  The  first  is  addressed  to  St.  Ignatius  of  An- 
tioch,  and  is  as  follows  : 

"  The  letter  of  the  Blessed  Virgin  Mary  to  St.  Ignatius  of 
Antioch. 

The  humble  handmaid  of  Jesus  Christ  salutes  Ignatius,  the 
beloved  disciple.  What  things  you  have  heard  of  John  concern- 
ing Jesus,  and  believed,  are  true.  Believe  them  ;  cleave  to 
them,  and  firmly  cling  to  the  doctrine  of  Christianity,  which 
thou  hast  received,  and  conform  thy  acts  and  thy  life  thereto. 
I  shall  come  with  John  to  visit  thee  and  those  that  are  with 
thee.  Stand  fast  in  faith,  and  work  manfully.  Let  not  the 
acerbity  of  persecution  move  thee,  but  let  thy  spirit  wax 
strong,  and  exult  in  God,  thy  Saviour.     Amen." 

The  second  is  to  the  people  of  Messina,  the  text  of  which 
is  as  follows : 

"  The  Virgin  Mary,  daughter  of  Joachim,  the  most  humble 
handmaid  of  God,  the  mother  of  the  crucified  Jesus,  of  the 
tribe  of  Juda,  of  the  line  of  David,  sends  greeting  and  the 
blessing  of  the  Almighty  God  to  all  of  Messina. 

It  is  attested  by  public  document  that  ye  in  great 
faith  sent  to  us  messengers  and  legates,  (vos  omnes 
fide  magna  legatos  et  nuncios  per  publicum  documen- 
tum  ad  nos  misisse  constat).  Being  taught  the  way  of 
truth  through  the  preaching  of  Paul,  ye  confess  that  our  Son 
is  the  begotten  of  God,  God  and  man,  and  that  after  his 
resurrection,  he  ascended  into  Heaven.  Wherefore,  we  bless 
you  and  your  city,  and  profess  ourselves  its  perpetual  pro- 
tector. 

In  the  year  of  our  Son  forty-two,  the  Nones  of  July,  the 
seventeenth  moon,  the  fifth  day  of  the  week,  at  Jerusalem, 

The  Virgin  Mary." 


364     THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AND  THE  APOCRYPHA. 

Any  one  that  has  ever  read  the  Magnificat,  or  Mary's  his- 
tory in  the  Gospel,  has  no  need  of  other  proof  than  the  mere 
reading  to  pronounce  this  a  forgery.  It  is,  in  mode  of  expres- 
sion, as  bombastic  as  a  state  document  in  Rome,  in  the  days 
of  the  humanists.  Critics  wisely  concur  in  placing  them 
as  supposititious,  and  assign  to  them  a  quite  recent 
date. 

In  the  Cathedral  Church  in  Messina,  there  exists  an  exemplar 
of  this  letter,  and  on  the  fifth  of  June,  the  yearly  commemora- 
tion of  it  is  celebrated,  called  by  the  people  **  Festa  della  Sacra 
Lettera,"  Rev.  Father  Inchofer  published  in  163 1  an  erudite 
defense  of  the  authenticity  of  the  letter.  It  is  an  evidence 
of  the  strange  uses  to  which  a  man  may  devote  talents  of  a  high 
order. 

A  third  letter  of  the  Blessed  Virgin  is  directed  to  the 
Florentines  :  "  Florence,  dear  to  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  my 
son,  and  to  me.  Hold  to  the  faith,  be  instant  in  prayer,  be 
strong  in  patience,  for  by  these  will  you  obtain  eternal  salva- 
tion with  God."  In  some  text  there  is  added :  "  and  glory 
with  men." 

This  letter  is  of  the  same  character  as  the  former,  and  its 
origin  is  similar. 

The  same  Fabricus  and  Sixtus  of  Sienna,  have  preserved 
for  us  six  letters  of  the  Apostle  Paul  to  Seneca,  and  eight 
letters  of  Seneca  to  Paul.  They  at  least  have  the  credit  of 
antiquity,  since  Jerome  (De  Vir.  111.)  and  Augustine  (Epist.  54 
ad  Maced.)  praise  them.  The  drift  of  the  letters  is  moral,  and 
they  contain  nothing  contrary  to  doctrine,  but,  from  internal 
evidence  critics  agree  that  they  are  supposititious.  They  con- 
tain nothing  of  Paul's  vigor  of  thought.  The  opinion  is  well 
founded,  however,  that  relations  of  esteem  existed  between 
Seneca  and  Paul,  and  some  have  held  that  there  did  exist 
some  letters  of  their  correspondence,  of  which  these  are  forged 
imitations. 

Liturgies  exist  of  St.  Peter,  St.  James,  St.  Matthew,  and 
St.  Mark.  That  they  are  not  of  the  authorship  of  these  is 
plain.  It  is  probable,  however,  that  they  were  written  during 
the  Apostolic  epoch  or  soon  after,  but  have  suffered  later 
interpolations  and  additions. 

In  the  founts  of  tradition  we  find  mention  of  the  "  Doc- 
trine of  the  Apostles,"  "  The  Constitutions  of  the  Apostles," 
"  The  Canons  of  the  Apostles,"  and  "  The  Two  Ways  or  Judg- 
ment of  Peter."  These  seem  to  be  different  forms  of  one 
composite  work,  composed  of  the  Constitutions  and  Canons  of 


THE   CANON   OF   N.   T.   AND   THE  APOCRYPHA.  365 

the  Apostles.  Concerning  these,  we  excerpt  the  following 
data  from  Smith's  &  Cheetham's  Dictionary  of  Christian  An- 
tiquities : 

About  500  A.  D.,  Dionysius  Exiguus,  a  Roman  monk  of 
great  learning,  at  the  request  of  Stephen,  Bishop  of  Salona, 
made  a  collection  of  Greek  Canons,  translating  them  into  Latin. 
At  the  head  of  this  collection  he  placed  50  Canons,  with  this 
title,  "  Incipiunt  Regulae  Ecclesiasticae  sanctorum  Apostolo- 
rum,  prolatae  per  Clementem  Ecclesiae  Romanae  Pontificem." 
At  the  same  time,  however,  Dionysius  says  in  the  preface  to 
his  work,  "  In  principio  itaque  canones,  qui  dicuntur  Aposto- 
lorum,  de  Graeco  transtulimus  quibus  quia  plurimi  consensum 
non  praebuere  facilem.,\\oz  ipsum  vestram  noluimus  ignorare 
sanctitatem,  quamvis  postea  quaedam  constitutapontificum  ex- 
ipsis  canonibus  assumpta  esse  videantur." 

These  words  obviously  point  to  a  difference  of  opinion  pre- 
vailing in  the  Church,  though  it  has  been  doubted  by  some 
whether  the  dissentients  spoken  of  rejected  the  Canons  alto- 
gether, or  merely  denied  that  they  were  the  work  of  the 
Apostles.  And  with  regard  to  the  last  clause,  it  is  much  dis- 
puted whether  previous  popes  can  be  shown  to  have  known 
and  cited  these  Canons.  Hefele  denies  that  "  Pontifices " 
means  Popes,  and  would  understand  it  of  bishops  in  their  syn- 
odical  constitutions. 

About  fifty  years  after  the  work  of  Dionysius,  John  of  An- 
tioch,  otherwise  called  Johannes  Scholasticus,  patriarch  of 
Constantinople,  set  forth  a  cvvra'yfJLa  kuvovcov,  which  contained 
not  50  but  85  Canons  of  the  Apostles.  And  in  the  year  692 
these  were  expressly  recognized  in  the  decrees  of  the  Quinisex- 
tine  Council,  not  only  as  binding  Canons,  but  (it  would  seem) 
as  of  apostolic  origin.  They  are  therefore  in  force  in  the  Greek 
Church. 

How  it  came  to  pass  that  Dionysius  translated  only  50  does 
not  appear.  Some  writers  have  supposed  that  he  rejected 
what  was  not  to  be  reconciled  with  the  Roman  practice.  But, 
as  Hefele  observes,  this  could  hardly  be  his  motive,  inasmuch 
as  he  retains  a  canon  as  to  the  nullity  of  heretical  baptism, 
which  is  at  variance  with  the  view  of  the  Western  Church. 
Hence  it  has  been  suggested  that  the  MS.  used  by  Dionysius 
was  of  a  different  class  from  that  of  John  of  Antioch  (for  they 
vary  in  some  expressions,  and  have  also  a  difference  in  the 
numbering  of  the  canons),  and  that  it  may  have  had  only  the 
50  translated  by  the  former.  And  an  inference  has  also  been 
drawn  that  the  35   latter  Canons  are  of  later  date.     Indeed, 


366     THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AND  THE  APOCRYPHA. 

according  to  some,  they  are  obviously  of  a  different  type,  and 
were  possibly  added  to  the  collection  at  the  same  time  that 
the  Canons  were  appended  to  the  Constitutions. 

Both  in  the  collection  of  John  of  Antioch,  and  in  that  of 
Dionysius  they  are  alleged  to  have  been  drawn  up  by  Clement 
from  the  directions  of  the  Apostles.  In  several  places  the 
Apostles  speak  in  the  first  person,  and  in  the  85th  canon 
Clement  uses  the  first  person  singular  of  himself. 

Their  subjects  are  briefly  as  follow: 

"I  &  2  (I.  &  II.).  Bishop  to  be  ordained  by  two  or  three 
bishops ;  presbyters  and  deacons,  and  the  rest  of  the  clerical 
body,  by  one. 

3  &  4  (III.)  relate  to  what  is  proper  to  be  offered  at  the 
altar ;  mentioning  new  corn,  grapes,  and  oil,  and  incense  at  the 
time  of  the  holy  oblation. 

5  (IV.).  First-fruits  of  other  things  are  to  be  sent  to  the 
clergy  at  their  home,  not  brought  to  the  altar. 

6  (V.).  Bishop  or  presbyter  or  deacon  not  to  put  away  his 
wife  under  pretence  of  piety. 

7  (VI.).     Clergy  not  to  take  secular  cares  on  them. 

8  (VII.).  Nor  to  keep  Easter  before  the  vernal  equinox, 
according  to  the  Jewish  system. 

9  (VIII.).  Nor  to  fail  to  communicate  without  some  good 
reason. 

10  (IX.).  Laity  not  to  be  present  at  the  reading  of  the 
Scriptures  without  remaining  for  prayer  and  the  Communion. 

1 1  (X.).  None  to  join  in  prayer,  even  in  a  house,  with  an 
excommunicated  person. 

12  (XI.).  Clergy  not  to  join  in  prayer  with  a  deposed  man, 
as  if  he  were  still  a  cleric. 

13  (XII.  &  XIII.).  Clergy  or  lay  persons,  being  under  ex- 
communication or  not  admitted  to  Communion,  going  to 
another  city,  not  to  be  received  without  letters. 

14  (XIV.).  Bishop  not  to  leave  his  own  diocese  and  invade 
another,  even  on  request,  except  for  good  reasons,  as  in  case 
he  can  confer  spiritual  benefit ;  nor  even  then  except  by  the 
judgment  of  many  other  bishops,  and  at  pressing  request. 

15  (XV.).  If  clergy  leave  their  own  diocese,  and  take  up 
their  abode  in  another  without  consent  of  their  own  bishop, 
they  are  not  to  perform  clerical  functions  there. 

16  (XVI.).  Bishop  of  such  diocese  not  to  treat  them  as 
clergy. 

17  (XVII.).  One  twice  married  after  baptism,  or  who  has 
taken  a  concubine,  not  to  be  a  cleric. 


THE  Canon  of  n.  t.  and  the  apocrypha.        367 

1 8  (XVIII.).  One  who  has  married  a  widow  or  divorced 
woman,  or  a  courtesan  or  a  slave,  or  an  actress,  not  to  be  ad- 
mitted into  the  clerical  body. 

19  (XIX.).  Nor  one  who  has  married  two  sisters  or  his 
niece. 

20  (XX.)     Clergy  not  to  become  sureties. 

21  (XXI.).  One  who  has  been  made  a  eunuch  by  violence, 
or  in  a  persecution,  or  was  so  born,  may  be  a  bishop. 

22  (XXII.).  But  if  made  so  by  his  own  act,  cannot  be 
a  cleric. 

23  (XXIII.).     A  cleric  making  himself  so,  to  be  deposed. 

24  (XXIV.).  A  layman  making  himself  a  eunuch,  to  be 
shut  out  from  Communion  for  three  years. 

25  &  26  (XXV.).  Clerics  guilty  of  incontinence,  perjury,  or 
theft,  to  be  deposed,  but  not  excommunicated  (citing  Nah.  i, 
9:  ovK  iSiKijaei  Bh  iirl  to  avro  iv  ^Xn^et). 

27  (XXVI.).  None  to  marry  after  entering  the  clerical 
body,  except  readers  and  singers. 

28  (XXVII.)     Clergy  not  to  strike  offenders. 

29  (XXVIII.).  Clergy  deposed  not  to  presume  to  act,  on 
pain  of  being  wholly  cut  off  from  the  Church. 

30  (XXIX.).  Bishop,  &c.  obtaining  ordination  by  money 
to  be  deposed,  and  together  with  him  who  ordained  him,  cut 
off  from  communion,  as  was  Simon  Magus  by  me,  Peter, 

31  (XXX.).  Bishop  obtaining  a  church  by  means  of  secular 
rulers  to  be  deposed,  &c. 

32  (XXXI.).  Presbyters  not  to  set  up  a  separate  congre- 
gation and  altar  in  contempt  of  his  bishop,  when  the  bishop  is 
just  and  godly. 

33  (XXXII.).  Presbyter  or  deacon,  under  sentence  of  his 
own  bishop  not  to  be  received  elsewhere. 

34  (XXXIII.).  Clergy  from  a  distance  not  to  be  received 
without  letters  of  commendation,  nor,  unless  they.be  preachers 
of  godliness,  are  they  to  have  anything  beyond  the  supply  of 
their  wants. 

35  (XXXIV.).  The  bishops  of  every  nation  are  to  know 
who  is  chief  among  them,  and  to  consider  him  their  head,  and 
do  nothing  without  his  judgment,  except  the  affairs  of  their 
own  dioceses,  nor  must  he  do  anything  without  their  judg- 
ment. 

36  (XXXV.).     Bishop  not  to  ordain  out  of  his  diocese. 

37  (XXXVI.).  Clergy  not  to  neglect  to  enter  on  the 
charge  to  which  they  are  appointed,  nor  the  people  to  refuse 
to  receive  them. 


368     THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AND  THE  APOCRYPHA. 

38  (XXXVI L).  Synod  of  bishops  to  be  held  twice  a  year 
to  settle  controversies. 

39  (XXXVIIL).  Bishop  to  have  care  of  all  ecclesiastical 
affairs,  but  not  to  appropriate  anything  for  his  own  family,  ex- 
cept to  grant  them  relief  if  in  poverty. 

40  (XXXIX.  &  XL.).  Clergy  to  do  nothing  without 
bishop.  Bishop  to  keep  his  own  affairs  separate  from  those  of 
the  Church,  and  to  provide  for  his  family  out  of  his  own  prop- 
erty. 

41  (XLI.).  Bishop  to  have  power  over  all  ecclesiastical 
affairs,  and  to  distribute  through  the  presbyters  and  deacons, 
and  to  have  a  share  himself  if  required. 

42  (XLII.).     Cleric  not  to  play  dice  or  take  to  drinking. 

43  (XLIII.).  Same  as  to  subdeacon,  reader,  singer,  or  lay- 
man. 

44  (XLiy.).     Clergy  not  to  take  usury. 

45  (XLV.).  Clergy  not  to  pray  with  heretics,  still  less  to 
allow  them  to  act  as  clergy. 

46  (XLVL).  Clergy  not  to  recognize  heretical  baptism  or 
sacrifice. 

47  (XLVII.).  Clergy  not  to  rebaptize  one  truly  baptized, 
nor  to  omit  to  baptize  one  polluted  by  the  ungodly,  otherwise 
he  contemns  the  cross  and  death  of  the  Lord,  and  does  not 
distinguish  true  priests  from  false. 

48  (XLVIII.).  Layman  who  has  put  away  his  wife  not  to 
take  another,  nor  to  take  a  divorced  woman. 

49  (XLIX.).  Baptism  to  be  in  name  of  Father,  Son,  and 
Holy  Ghost,  not  of  three  eternals,  or  three  sons,  or  three  para- 
cletes. 

50  (L.).  Baptism  to  be  performed  by  three  immersions, 
making  one  initiation — not  one  single  immersion  into  the 
Lord's  death. 

LI.  Clergy  not  to  hold  marriage,  or  the  use  of  meat  and 
wine,  things  evil  in  themselves,  or  to  abstain  on  any  other  than 
ascetic  grounds. 

LII.  Bishop  or  presbyter  to  receive,  not  to  reject  peni- 
tents. 

LIII.  Clergy  not  to  refuse  to  partake  of  meat  and  wine 
on  feast  days  [as  if  evil,  or  on  other  than  ascetic  grounds]. 

LIV.     Clerics  not  to  eat  in  taverns  except  on  a  journey. 

LV.     Clerics  not  to  insult  bishop. 

LVI.     Nor  presbyter  or  deacon. 

LVII.  Nor  to  mock  the  maimed,  deaf,  dumb,  blind,  or 
lame,  nor  must  a  layman  do  so. 


THE   CANON   OF   N.   T.   AND   THE   APOCRYPHA.  369 

LVIII.  Bishops  and  presbyters  not  to  neglect  their  clergy 
or  people. 

LIX.     Nor  to  refuse  succour  to  the  needy  clergy. 

LX.  Nor  to  publish  in  the  Church,  as  sacred,  works  forged 
by  the  ungodly  in  false  names. 

LXI.  Those  convicted  of  incontinence  or  other  forbidden 
practices  not  to  be  admitted  into  the  clerical  body. 

LXII.  Clerics,  from  fear  of  Jew  or  Gentile  or  heretic,  deny- 
ing Christ  to  be  excommunicated,  or  if  only  denying  that  they 
are  clerics,  to  be  deposed.  On  repentance,  to  be  admitted  as 
laymen. 

LXIII.  Cleric  eating  blood,  or  things  torn  by  beasts  or 
dying  of  themselves,  to  be  deposed,  on  account  of  the  prohibi- 
tion in  the  law.     Laymen  doing  so  to  be  excommunicated. 

LXIV.  Cleric  or  layman  entering  synagoge  of  Jews  or 
heretics  to  pray,  to  be  deposed  and  excommunicated. 

LXV.  Cleric,  in  a  struggle  striking  a  single  blow  that 
proves  mortal,  to  be  deposed  for  his  precipitancy.  Layman  to 
be  excommunicated. 

LXVL  Neither  cleric  nor  layman  to  fast  on  Sunday  or  on 
any  Saturday  but  one. 

LXVn.  Any  one  doing  violence  to  an  unbetrothed  virgin 
to  be  excommunicated.  He  may  not  take  another,  but  must 
keep  her,  though  poor. 

LXVin.  Clergy  not  to  be  ordained  a  second  time,  unless 
when  ordained  by  heretics,  for  those  baptized  or  ordained  by 
heretics  have  not  really  been  brought  into  the  number  of  the 
faithful  or  of  the  clergy. 

LXIX.  Bishop,  presbyter,  deacon,  reader,  or  singer,  not 
fasting  in  the  holy  forty  days,  or  on  the  fourth  and  sixth  days, 
to  be  deposed,  unless  suffering  from  bodily  weakness.  Lay- 
men to  be  excommunicated. 

LXX.  None  to  keep  fast  or  feast  with  the  Jews,  or  receive 
their  feast-gifts,  as  unleavened  bread  and  so  forth. 

LXXL  No  Christian  to  give  oil  for  a  heathen  temple  or 
Jewish  synagogue,  or  to  light  lamps  at  their  feast  times. 

LXXIL     Nor  to  purloin  wax  or  oil  from  the  Church. 

LXXIIL  Nor  to  convert  to  his  own  use  any  consecrated 
gold  or  silver  vessel  or  linen. 

LXXIV.  Bishop  accused  by  credible  men,  to  be  sum- 
moned by  the  bishops  ;  and  if  he  appear  and  confess  the 
charge,  or  be  proved  guilty,  to  have  appropriate  sentence ;  but 
if  he  do  not  obey  the  summons,  then  to  be  summoned  a  second 
and  third  time  by  two  bishops  personally ;  and  if  he  still  be 


370     THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AND  THE  APOCRYPHA. 

contumacious,  then  the  Synod  is  to  make  the  fit  decree  against 
him,  that  he  may  not  appear  to  gain  anything  by  evading 
justice. 

LXXV.  No  heretic,  nor  less  than  two  witnesses,  even  of 
the  faithful,  to  be  received  against  a  bishop  (Deut.  19,  15). 

LXXVI.  Bishop  not  to  ordain  relatives  bishops  out  of 
favour  or  affection. 

LXXVII.  One  having  an  eye  injured  or  lame  may  still  be 
a  bishop,  if  worthy. 

LXXVIII.  But  not  one  deaf,  dumb,  or  blind,  as  being 
practical  hindrances. 

LXXIX.  One  that  has  a  devil  not  to  be  a  cleric,  nor  even 
to  pray  with  the  faithful,  but  when  cleansed  he  may,  if  worthy. 

LXXX.  A  convert  from  the  heathen  or  from  a  vicious 
life  not  forthwith  to  be  made  a  bishop  ;  for  it  is  not  right  that 
while  yet  untried  he  should  be  a  teacher  of  others,  unless  this 
come  about  in  some  way  by  the  grace  of  God. 

LXXXI.  We  declare  that  a  bishop  or  presbyter  is  not  to 
stoop  to  public  [secular]  offices,  but  to  give  himself  to  the 
wants  of  the  Church  (Matt.  6,  24). 

LXXXII.  We  do  not  allow  slaves  to  be  chosen  into  the 
clerical  body  without  consent  of  their  masters,  to  the  injury  of 
those  who  possess  them,  for  this  would  subvert  households. 
But  if  a  slave  seem  worthy  of  ordination,  as  did  our  Onesimus, 
and  the  masters  consent  and  set  him  free,  let  him  be  ordained. 

LXXXIII.  Clergy  not  to  serve  in  the  army,  and  seek  to 
hold  both  Roman  command  and  priestly  duties  (Matt.  22,  21). 

LXXXIV.  Those  who  unjustly  insult  a  king  or  ruler  to 
be  punished. 

LXXXV.  For  you,  both  clergy  and  laity,  let  these  be,  as 
books  to  be  reverenced  and  held  holy,  in  the  Old  Testament 
— five  of  Moses,  Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus,  Numbers, 
Deuteronomy — of  Jesus  the  son  of  Nun,  one  ;  of  Judges,  one ; 
Ruth,  one ;  of  Kings,  four ;  of  Paraleipomena  the  book  of 
days,  two ;  of  Esdras,  two ;  of  Esther,  one ;  of  Maccabees, 
three ;  of  Job,  one  ;  of  the  Psalter,  one  ;  of  Solomon,  three — 
Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  Song  of  Songs ;  of  the  Prophets,  thir- 
teen ;  of  Isaiah,  one ;  of  Jeremiah,  one ;  of  Ezekiel,  one ;  of 
Daniel,  one.  Over  and  above  is  to  be  mentioned  to  you  that 
your  young  men  study  the  Wisdom  of  the  learned  Sirach.  But 
of  ours,  that  is  of  the  New  Testament,  let  there  be  four  gos- 
pels, Matthew's,  Mark's,  Luke's,  John's ;  fourteen  Epistles  of 
Paul ;  two  Epistles  of  Peter ;  three  of  John  ;  one  of  Jude  ;  two 
Epistles  of  Clement ;    and  the  regulations  addressed  to  you 


THE   CANON   OF   N.   T.   AND   THE   APOCRYPHA.  371 

bishops  through  me,  Clement,  in  eight  books,  which  it  is  not 
right  to  publish  before  all,  on  account  of  the  mysteries  in 
them  ;  and  the  Acts  of  us,  the  Apostles." 

The  above  is  merely  the  substance  of  the  Canons  in  an 
abridged  form.  It  will  not  of  course  supersede  the  necessity 
of  referring  to  the  original  in  order  to  form  an  exact  judgment. 
For  the  sake  of  brevity,  the  penalties  have  been  in  most  cases 
omitted.  They  are  usually  deposition  for  the  clergy,  excom- 
munication for  laymen. 

The  subject  is  too  vast  for  us  to  pass  any  critical  judgment 
thereon  here.  We  are  content  to  state  that  there  is  no  good 
evidence  that  the  works  should  be  attributed  to  the  Apostles. 

The  Apocryphal  Gospel  of  the  Hebrews  is  often 
spoken  of  in  early  tradition.  Its  origin  appears  from  the  fol- 
lowing data.  Out  of  the  Judaizing  tendencies  of  the  first  cen- 
tury, arose  the  sects  of  the  Nazarites  and  the  Ebionites.  Both 
these  sects  strove  to  bring  the  rites  of  the  Old  Law  into  the 
Christian  dispensation,  and  it  is  quite  certain  that  the  Ebion- 
ites rejected  the  divinity  of  Jesus  Christ.  Both  sects  used  a 
Gospel  in  Hebrew,  which  each  mutilated  and  adapted  to  their 
theories.  Excellent  historical  data  warrant  that  this  Hebrew 
text  was  a  recension  of  the  original  Hebrew  text  of  Matthew. 

(Irenaeus,  Haer.  I.  26,  2 ;  III.  il,  7;  Epiphanius,  Haer. 
XXVIII.  5  ;  XXX.  3,  13,  24;  Philaster,  Haer.  36;  Theodoret, 
Haer.  Fab.  II.  i  ;  comp.  Eusebius,  H.  E.  III.  25,  27 ;  Epiphan. 
Haer.  XXIX.  9 ;  XXX.  6,  etc.)  Papias  is  an  early  witness  for 
St.  Matthew  having  written  in  Hebrew  {ap.  Euseb.  III.  39) 
and  the  same  tradition  is  repeated  by  Irenaeus  {Haer.  III.  i,  i); 
Pantaenus  {ap.  Euseb.  H.  E.  v.  10) ;  Origen  {ap.  Euseb.  H.  E. 
VI.  25)  ;  Eusebius  {H.  E.  III.  24,  and  elsewhere);  Jerome  {in 
Matth.  Praefat.  et passim);  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  {Catech.  XIV.) 
The  existence  of  this  Gospel  of  the  Hebrews  as  a  distinct 
work,  differing  from  our  canonical  Gospel  of  St.  Matthew,  is 
first  put  on  record  by  Clemens  Alexandrinus  Strom.  II.  9  ;  p. 
453  Potter)  and  by  Origen  who  makes  several  citations  from  it 
{in  Joann.  tom.  II.  6  ;  in  Jerem.  XV.  4  ;  in  Matth.  tom.  XV.  14). 
Hegesippus  is  also  reported  to  have  borrowed  some  things 
from  the  Gospel  of  the  Hebrews  (Euseb.  H.  E.  IV.  22). 
According  to  Origin  {Horn.  I.  in  Luc.)  and  Jerome  {in  Matth. 
praef.;  c.  Pelag.  III.  i)  it  also  bore  among  the  Ebionites  the 
title  of  Gospel  according  to  the  Apostles.  Jerome  translated  it 
into  Greek  and  Latin  from  a  copy  found  at  Beroea(F^>.  illustr. 
2,  3  ;  «^  Mich.  VII.  2;  in  Matth.  XII.  13;  contra  Pelagian. 
III.  I). 


372     THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AND  THE  APOCRYPHA. 

Jerome's  testimony  alone  on  this  point  would  be  conclusive. 
"  Matthew,"  he  says,  "  who  is  also  called  Levi,  the  publican 
called  to  be  an  Apostle,  was  the  first  who  wrote  in  Hebrew 
words  and  characters  the  Gospel  for  the  converted  Jews.  It 
is  uncertain  who  afterwards  translated  this  into  Greek.  The 
Hebrew  Exemplar  is  preserved  to-day  in  the  library  at  Caesa, 
rea,  which  Pamphilius,  the  martyr,  with  great  zeal  founded. 
Permission  to  copy  this  volume  was  given  me  by  the  Nazarites 
of  Beroea,  a  city  of  Syria."  (De  Vir.  111.  III.  P.  L.  Migne, 
23,  614.) 

He  testifies  (in  Math.  XII.  13,  P.  L.  26,  78)  that  he  translated 
this  text  into  Greek.  Hence,  we  conclude  that  the  original 
text  in  Hebrew  of  Matthew,  mutilated  and  interpolated,  formed 
the  apocryphal  Gospel  of  the  Hebrews.  Only  fragments  of  it 
remain,  which  have  been  collected  by  Hilgenfeld.  (Nov.  Test, 
extra  can.  recept.  IV.) 

The  Epistle  of  Paul  to  the  Laodiceans  is  mentioned 
in  Muratori's  fragment,  and  by  Jerome  and  Theodoret. 
(Hier.  De  Vir.  111.  V. ;  Theod.  in  Coll.  IV.  16.)  Both  these 
Fathers  repudiate  it.  In  the  Codex  of  Fulda,  the  text  of 
such  a  letter  exists.  From  Colossians,  IV.  16,  it  is  highly 
probable  that  Paul  wrote  to  the  Church  of  Laodicea,  but  it  is 
evident  from  an  inspection  of  the  text  of  Fulda  that  it  is  sup- 
posititious. The  same  judgment  must  be  passed  on  the  third 
letter  to  the  Corinthians,  which  the  Armenians  retain  in  their 
bibles. 

The  Epistle  of  Barnabas,  before  mentioned,  was  in 
much  favor  in  the  early  Church.  Clement  of  Alexandria  and 
Origen  considered  it  authentic.  Eusebius  (Hist.  Eccles.  III.  25,) 
places  it  among  the  spurious  books.  It  is  found  in  the  Codex 
of  Mt.  Sinai.  Some  of  those  who  have  denied  the  inspiration 
of  the  book  have  maintained  that  it  was  of  Barnabas'  author- 
ship. But  the  internal  evidence  disproves  its  divinity  and  its 
authorship.  The  matter  is  trifling  and  excessively  allegorical, 
ill  fitting  the  "  son  of  consolation,"  the  co-laborer  of  Paul. 
The  writer  reveals  complete  ignorance  of  the  Jewish  Law  and 
rites ;  whereas  Barnabas  was  a  Levite,  who  had  lived  long  in 
Jerusalem.  Moreover,  the  writer  is  opposed  to  the  Jewish 
Law,  even  to  deal  with  it  unjustly.  These  reasons  moved 
Hefele  to  reject  the  authorship  of  the  Epistle,  and  we  believe 
them  conclusive.  As  to  date,  though  we  may  not  be  certain, 
it  is  most  probably  a  product  of  the  first  century. 

In  the  latter  half  of  the  second  century  there  was  in  circu- 
lation  a  book   of    visions  and    allegories,   purporting   to    be 


THE   CANON   OF   N.   T.   AND   THE   APOCRYPHA.  373 

written  by  one  Hermas,  and  which  was  commonly  known  as 
The  Shepherd.  This  book  was  treated  with  respect  bordering 
on  that  paid  to  the  canonical  Scriptures  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, and  it  came  into  the  public  reading  of  different  churches. 
A  passage  from  it  is  quoted  by  Irenaeus  (IV.  20,  p.  253)  with 
the  words,  "  Well  said  the  Scripture,"  a  fact  taken  notice  of  by 
Eusebius  {H.  E.  v.  8).  We  may  with  probability  infer  that  in 
the  time  of  Irenaeus  the  work  was  publicly  read  in  the  Galilean 
churches,  for  if  Irenaeus  were  not  quoting  a  well-known  text, 
he  would  be  likely  to  have  named  the  source  of  his  quotation ; 
but  that  he  did  not  place  the  book  on  a  level  with  the  canoni- 
cal Scriptures  may  be  inferred  from  his  having  quoted  it  but 
once,  not  appealing  to  it  in  his  discussion  of  Scripture  testi- 
monies in  his  third  book.  The  mutilated  commencement  of 
the  Stromateis  of  Clement  of  Alexandria,  opens  in  the  middle 
of  a  quotation  from  The  Shepherd,  and  about  ten  times  else- 
where he  cites  the  book,  always  with  a  complete  acceptance  of 
the  reality  and  divine  character  of  the  revelations  made  to 
Hermas,  but  without  any  explanation  of  his  opinion,  who  Her- 
mas was  or  when  he  lived.  In  the  next  generation  Origen, 
who  frequently  cites  the  book,  says  {in  Rom.  XVI.  14,  vol,  IV. 
p.  683),  that  it  seems  to  him  very  useful,  and  he  gives  it  as  his 
individual  opinion  that  it  was  divinely  inspired.  He  further 
makes  a  guess,  which  was  repeated  by  others  after  him,  but 
which  appears  to  rest  on  no  earlier  authority,  that  it  was 
written  by  the  Hermas  mentioned  at  the  end  of  the  Epistle  to 
the  Romans.  His  other  quotations  show  that  less  favorable 
views  of  the  book  were  current  in  his  time.  His  quotations 
from  The  Shepherd  are  carefully  separated  from  those  from  the 
canonical  books  ;  he  generally  adds  to  a  quotation  from  The 
Shepherd  a  saving  clause,  giving  the  reader  permission  to  reject 
it ;  he  speaks  of  it  {in  Matt.  XIX.  7,  Vol.  III.  p.  644)  as  a 
writing  current  in  the  Church,  but  not  acknowledged  by  all, 
and  {De  Princ.  IV.  1 1)  as  a  book  despised  by  some.  Eusebius 
(II.  25),  places  the  book  among  the  voQa  with  the  Acts  of 
Paul,  Revelation  of  Peter,  Epistle  of  Barnabas,  etc.  Else- 
where (III.  3),  while  he  is  unable  to  place  it  among  the 
ofjioXor^ovixeva  as  being  rejected  by  some,  he  owns  that  it  had 
been  publicly  used  in  churches,  that  some  of  the  most  eminent 
writers  had  employed  it,  and  that  it  was  judged  by  some  most 
necessary  for  those  who  have  particular  need  of  elementary 
instruction  in  the  faith.  Athanasius,  too  {Ep.  Fest,  39,  Vol.  I. 
pt.  II.  p.  963),  classes  The  Shepherd  with  some  of  the  deutero- 
canonical  books  of  the  Old  Testament  and  with  "  the  teaching 


374     THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AND  THE  APOCRYPHA. 

of  the  Apostles,"  as  not  canonical,  but  useful  to  be  employed 
in  catechetical  instruction.  The  Shepherd  is  found  in  the  Sinai- 
tic  MS.  following  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas,  as  an  appendix  to 
the  books  of  the  New  Testament.  After  the  fourth  century 
the  book  rapidly  passed  out  of  ecclesiastical  use  in  the  East. 
The  Western  tradition  as  to  the  book  deserves  more  atten- 
tion, as  external  evidence  shows  Rome  to  have  been  its  place  of 
composition.  Foremost  comes  the  writer  of  the  MURATORIAN 
Fragment  on  the  Canon,  who  tells  us  that  the  book  had  been 
written  during  the  episcopate  of  Pius,  by  Hermas,  a  brother  of 
that  bishop,  in  a  period  which  the  writer  speaks  of  as  within  then 
living  memory.  He  concludes  that  the  book  ought  to  be  read, 
but  not  to  be  publicly  used  in  the  Church  among  the  prophetic 
writings,  the  number  of  which  was  complete,  nor  among  the 
apostolic.  The  statement  that  the  book  not  only  might  but 
ought  to  be  read  is  a  high  recognition  of  the  value  attributed 
to  it  by  the  writer,  and  we  may  gather  that  at  least  in  some 
places  the  church  use  of  the  book  at  that  time  had  been  such 
as  to  cause  danger  of  its  being  set  on  a  level  with  the  canoni- 
cal Scriptures.  Tertullian,  in  one  of  his  earliest  treatises,  De 
Oratione,  disputes  against  a  practice  of  sitting  down  immed- 
iately after  prayer,  for  which  he  knows  no  other  reason  assigned 
than  that,  in  The  Shepherd,  Hermas  is  said,  on  prayer  ended,  to 
have  sat  upon  the  bed.  He  points  out  the  unreasonableness 
of  converting  a  narrative  statement  into  a  rule  of  discipline,  and 
remarks  that,  if  it  were  so  regarded,  the  precept  of  sitting  on  a 
bed  would  not  be  satisfied  by  sitting  on  a  bench  or  chair.  A 
book  which  could  so  influence  the  practice  of  churches  must 
evidently  have  enjoyed  high  authority  at  the  time,  an  authority 
which  Tertullian's  argument  does  not  dispute.  It  had  probab- 
ly been  translated  into  Latin,  and  was  used  in  church  reading. 
That  Tertullian  read  it  in  a  Latin  translation,  may  be  inferred 
from  his  describing  it  by  the  Latin  title  Pastor,  and  not  by  a 
Greek  title,  as  he  usually  does  when  he  refers  to  Greek  writ- 
ings. Very  different  is  Tertullian's  treatment  of  the  book  some 
ten  years  later  or  more,  after  he  had  become  a  Montanist. 
When  the  authority  of  The  Shepherd  is  urged  in  behalf  of  re- 
admitting adulterers  to  communion,  he  rejects  the  book  as 
one  not  counted  worthy  of  being  included  in  the  Canon,  but 
placed  by  every  council  of  the  churches,  even  of  the  Catholic 
party,  among  false  and  apocryphal  writings  {De  Pudic.  cap.  lo). 
Quoting  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  he  says  that  this  is  at 
least  more  received  than  that  apocryphal  Shepherd  of  the 
adulterers  (Cap.  20).     The  phrase  "  more  received  "  warns  us  to 


THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AND  THE  APOCRYPHA.     376 

t^t  cum grano  salis  Tertullian's  assertion  as  to  the  universal rt- 
jection  of  The  Shepherd;  but  we  may  well  believe  that  the  line 
of  distinction  between  apostolic  and  later  writings  was  then 
being  drawn  more  sharply  than  it  had  been  before,  and  that  in 
the  interval  between  Tertullian's  two  writing's,  The  Shepherd 
was  excluded  from  the  public  reading  of  many  churches  which 
before  had  admitted  it.  Possibly  to  this  result  may  have  con- 
tributed the  publication  by  the  Muratorian  writer  of  the  great- 
ness of  the  interval  which  separated  Hermas  from  apostolic 
times.  The  statement  of  this  writer  is  repeated  in  an  entry  in 
the  Liberian  papal  catalogue,  that  under  the  episcopate  of 
Pius,  his  brother  Hermas  wrote  a  book  in  which  the  commands 
and  precepts  were  contained,  which  the  angel  gave  him  when 
he  came  to  him  in  the  habit  of  a  shepherd.  It  has  been 
thought  with  high  probability,  that  this  entry  was  derived 
from  the  catalouge  of  Hippolytus,  which  is  the  basis  of  the 
Liberian  catalogue  [Chronicon  Canisianum].  It  will  be 
observed  that,  while  refusing  to  assign  the  book  to  apostolic 
times,  it  makes  no  doubt  of  the  reality  of  the  angelic  appear- 
ance to  Hermas.  Later  biographical  notices  of  popes,  under- 
take to  tell  what  the  message  given  to  Hermas  was,  namely, 
that  Easter  should  always  be  celebrated  on  a  Sunday.  This 
notice  clearly  is  the  offspring  of  a  time  when  all  knowledge  of 
the  book  of  Hermas  had  been  lost,  and  when  it  was  attempted 
to  supply  by  invention  the  imperfection  of  the  earlier  entry. 
This  story  of  a  revelation  to  Hermas  about  Easter  celebration 
is  amplified  a  little  in  the  forged  decretal  letter  of  Pius  I. 
(Mansi,  Concil.  I.  672).  The  later  papal  catalogues  makes  Pius 
the  brother  of  Pastor,  and  another  spurious  letter  of  Pius  tells 
of  a  contemporary  presbyter  Pastor.  The  poem  of  the  Pseudo- 
Tertullian  against  Marcion,  had  described  the  brother  of  Pius 
as  "  angeHcus  Pastor."  A  confusion  between  the  name  of 
Hermas  and  that  of  his  book  would  imply  that  the  book  was 
not  at  the  time  in  use.  Jerome,  when  copying  what  Eusebius 
had  said  about  the  book  {De  Vir.  Illust.  10,  Vol.  II.  845),  adds 
that  among  the  Latins  it  was  almost  unknown.  He  himself 
speaks  contemptuously  of  it  {In  Habac.  I.  14,  Vol.  VI.  p.  604), 
for  it  seems  to  us  certain  that  the  book  of  Hermas  is  what  he 
here  refers  to,  It  is  marked  in  the  Gelasian  decree  as  apocry- 
phal. Notwithstanding,  there  are  several  traces  that  some  use 
of  the  book  continued  in  the  West,  one  decisive  fact  being  that 
there  still  exist  some  twenty  MSS.  of  the  Latin  version.  In 
the  African  church  of  the  fourth  century  we  find  from  the  list 
in  the  Codex  Claromontanus  (Westcott,  Canon  N.   T.  p.   557) 


376     THE  CANON  OF  N.  T.  AND  THE  APOCRYPHA. 

that  it  was  placed  with  the  Acts  of  Paul,  and  the  Revelation 
of  St.  Peter  as  an  appendix  to  the  New  Testament  books ;  and  it 
occupies  a  similar  place  in  the  Sinaitic  MS.,  the  only  Greek  Bible 
known  to  have  contained  it.  But  in  some  of  the  existing  Latin 
MSS.  it  is  placed  with  the  apocryphal  books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, a  position  no  doubt  assigned  to  it  in  conformity  with 
the  opinion  of  Athanasius  already  quoted,  which  was  known 
through  Rufinus  in  the  West. 

Turning  now  from  the  external  history  of  the  book  to  the 
book  itself,  we  find  it  divides  itself  into  three  parts.  The  first 
part  consists  of  visions.  It  opens  with  what  reads  like  the 
narration  of  a  real  dream.  Hermas  tells  that  he  who  had 
brought  him  up,  had  sold  him  at  Rome  to  a  lady  named  Rhoda, 
that  after  a  considerable  time  he  renewed  his  acquaintance 
with  her  and  began  to  love  her  as  a  sister  ;  that  he  saw  her  one 
day  bathing  in  the  Tiber  and  assisted  her  out  of  the  water  ;  that 
admiring  her  beauty,  he  thought  within  himself  how  happy  he 
should  be  if  he  had  a  wife  like  her  in  person  and  disposition. 
Further  than  this  his  thought  did  not  go.  But  a  little  time 
after  he  had  a  vision.  He  fell  asleep,  and  in  his  dream  he  was 
walking  and  struggling  in  ground  so  rugged  and  broken  that  it 
was  impossible  to  pass.  At  length  he  succeeded  in  crossing 
the  water  by  which  his  path  had  been  washed  away,  and  com- 
ing into  smooth  ground  knelt  to  confess  his  sins  to  God. 
Then  the  heavens  were  opened,  and  he  saw  Rhoda  salut- 
ing him  from  the  sky.  On  his  asking  her  what  she  did  there, 
she  told  him  she  had  been  taken  up  to  accuse  him,  because 
God  was  angry  with  him  for  having  sinned  in  thought  against 
her.  Then  Hermas  was  overwhelmed  with  horror  and  fear, 
not  knowing  how  he  could  abide  the  severity  of  God's  judg- 
ment, if  such  a  thought  as  his  was  marked  a  sin.  Rhoda  now 
passes  out  of  his  dream,  and  he  sees  a  venerable  aged  lady  clad 
in  shining  garments  sitting  on  a  great  white  chair  and  holding 
a  book  in  her  hand.  She  asks  him  why  he,  usually  so  cheerful, 
is  now  so  sad.  On  telling  her,  she  owns  what  a  sin  any  impure 
thought  would  be  in  one  so  chaste,  so  singleminded  and  so  inno- 
cent as  he  ;  but  she  tells  him  this  is  not  why  God  is  displeased 
with  him,  but  because  of  the  sins  of  his  children,  whom  he, 
through  false  indulgence,  had  allowed  to  corrupt  themselves,,  but 
to  whom  repentance  was  open  if  he  would  warn  them.  Then  she 
reads  to  him  out  of  her  book,  but  of  all  she  reads  he  can  remem- 
ber nothing  save  the  last  sentence,  save  that  this  alone  was  com- 
forting, and  all  that  preceded  was  terrible  and  threatening.  She 
parted  from  him  with  the  words,  "  Play  the  man,  Hermas." 


THE   LOST   BOOKS   OF   BOTH   TESTAMENTS.  377 

In  another  vision,  a  year  after,  he  saw  again  the  lady  and 
her  book,  and  received  the  book  to  copy,  but  still  it  conveyed 
no  idea  to  his  mind.  He  then  set  himself  by  fasting  and 
prayer  to  learn  the  meaning  of  it,  and  after  a  fortnight  was 
gratified.  He  learns,  too,  that  the  lady  whom  he  had  seen  is 
not,  as  he  had  imagined,  the  sibyl,  but  the  Church,  and  that 
she  appeared  as  old  because  she  was  created  first  of  all,  and 
for  her  sake  the  world  was  made. 

After  his  first  two  visions,  Hermas  watched  eagerly  for  new 
revelations,  and  set  himself  to  obtain  them  by  fasting  and 
prayer.  In  those  later  visions,  while  the  pictures  presented  to 
his  mind  are  such  as  we  can  without  difficulty  believe  to  have 
been  dream  representations,  the  explanations  given  of  them 
have  a  coherence  only  to  be  found  in  the  thoughts  of  a  waking 
man.  This  is  still  more  true  of  the  second  and  third  parts  of 
the  work.  At  the  end  of  a  first  part  he  has  the  vision  in  which 
he  sees  him,  who  gives  the  name,  which,  in  strictness  only  be- 
longs to  these  two  latter  parts  of  the  work,  a  man  dressed  like 
a  Shepherd,  who  tells  him  that  he  is  the  angel  of  repentance, 
who  has  come  to  dwell  with  him,  being  the  guardian  to 
whose  care  he  had  been  entrusted.  From  this  Shepherd  he 
receives,  for  the  instruction  of  himself  and  of  the  Church,  the 
"  Commandments,"  which  form  the  second,  and  the  "  Sim- 
ilitudes," which  form  the  third,  part  of  the  work.  (Salmon 
in  Diet,  of  Christ.  Biog.) 

The  compass  of  the  present  work  will  not  permit  us  to 
review  the  numerous  other  apocryphal  writings. 

Chapter  XVI. 
The  Lost  Books  of  Both  Testaments. 

It  is  the  common  opinion  of  theologians  that  an  inspired 
book  may  perish,  and  that  some  de  facto  have  perished.  As 
authorities  for  this  opinion  we  may  cite  Origen,  Chrysostom, 
St,  Thomas,  Bellarmine,  Serarius,  Pineda,  Bonfrere,  and  nearly 
all  the  later  Theologians.* 

Salmeron  strove  to  set  aside  this  opinion  by  the  following 
arguments  :  "  The  Providence  of  God,  which  gave  a  book  to 
teach  men,  will  preserve  that  book.  Moreover,  if  the  Church, 
even  in  its  preparatory  state  in  the  Old  Law,  should  allow  a 

*0rig.  in  Cant.  Prol.  c.  fin.  (M.  13,  84) ;  8.  Chrys.  in  1.  Cor.  hom.  7,  3 
(M.  61,  58);  8.  Thorn.  Comm.  in  ep.  S.  Paul,  ad  1  Cor.  5,  4  et  Col.  4,  16; 
Bellarm.  de  verbo  Dei  IV.  4 ;  8erar.  Proleg.  c.  VIII.  qu.  14.  15 ;  Pineda 
Salom.  praev.  I.  1 ;  Bonfrer.  Praeloq.  VI.  2,  etc. 


378  THE   LOST   BOOKS   OF  BOTH   TESTAMENTS. 

book  to  perish,  which  had  been  committed  to  her  care,  she 
would  be  unfaithful  to  her  trust."  In  response  we  say  first 
that  two  questions  are  confused  here.  It  is  one  thing  that  a 
book  divinely  inspired,  not  yet  canonized  by  the  Church, 
should  perish  ;  another  that  a  book  delivered  to  the  Church 
by  canonization  should  perish.  This  latter  fact  has  never  hap- 
pened. Franzelin,  in  response  to  Salmeron,  argues  that  it  is 
possible  that  even  a  canonical  book  should  perish,  for  the 
reason  that  such  book  is  not  the  sole  or  absolutely  necessary 
means  of  teaching  men  the  truth.  The  Church  is  only  in- 
fallible and  indefectible  in  furnishing  an  adequate  means  to 
impart  truth  to  man,  and  her  teaching  power  would  not  be 
hampered  by  the  loss  of  a  book,  or  portion  thereof,  of  Holy 
Scripture.  The  argument  of  Salmeron  that  God,  who  gave 
the  book,  would  preserve  it,  is  feeble,  for  the  book  may  be 
superseded  by  another,  or  it  may  not  be  necessary  for  succeed- 
ing ages. 

The  common  opinion  is,  therefore,  that  an  inspired  book 
may  perish,  and  that  some  have  perished.  Many  proverbs 
and  canticles  of  Solomon  and  writings  of  Prophets,  spoken  of 
in  the  Scriptures,  have  certainly  perished,  and  some,  at  least, 
of  these  were  inspired. 

In  the  Old  Testament  we  find  mention  of  the  following 
works  :  The  Book  of  the  Wars  of  the  Lord  (Num.  XXI.  14) ; 
The  Book  of  the  Just  (Jos.  X.  13) ;  The  Book  of  the  Words  of 
the  Days  of  Solomon  (II.  Sam.  XI.  41) ;  The  Book  of  the 
Words  of  the  Days  of  the  Kings  of  Juda  (III.  Kings,  XIV.  19); 
The  Book  of  the  Words  of  the  Days  of  the  Kings  of  Israel 
(III.  Kings  XIV.  20);  The  Book  of  Samuel  the  Prophet 
(I.  Chron.  XXIX.  29) ;  The  Words  of  Nathan,  the  Prophet 
(1.  c.)  :  The  Book  of  Gad,  the  Prophet  (1.  c.) ;  The  Books  of 
Ahias  (II.  Chron.  IX.  29) ;  The  Vision  of  Addo,  the  Prophet 
(1.  c);  The  Book  of  Semeia  the  Prophet  (II.  Chron.  XII.  15); 
The  Book  of  Jehu,  the  Son  of  Hanan  (II.  Chron.  XX.  34) ; 
The  Discourse  of  Hosai  (II.  Chron.  XXXIII.  19);  The  Deeds 
of  Ozias  by  Isaiah  (II.  Chron.  XXVI.  22) ;  three  thousand 
Parables  of  Solomon  (III.  Kings  IV.  22) ;  five  thousand  Can- 
ticles of  Solomon  (1.  c.) ;  the  treatise  of  Solomon  on  Natural 
History  (1.  c);  certain  writings  of  Jeremiah  (II.  Maccab.  II.  i); 
The  Book  of  the  Days  of  John  Hyrcanus  (I.  Maccab.  XVI. 
24) ;  The  Book  of  Jason,  the  Cyrenean  (II.  Maccab. 
II.  24). 

We  hold  it  undoubted  that  a  person  inspired,  in  one  pro- 
duction, may  write  another  without  such  influence  of  the  Holy 


THE   HEBREW   TEXT   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT.  379 

Spirit.  We  admit  that  some  of  the  mentioned  works  were  not 
inspired  ;  but  there  are  others  whose  titles  clearly  prove  that 
they  were  inspired  works,  and  we  no  longer  possess  them. 

Of  the  New  Testament,  nearly  all  admit  that  one  of  Paul's 
Epistles  to  the  Corinthians  (I.  Cor.  V.  9),  and  the  Epistle  to 
the  Church  of  Laodicea  (Coloss.  IV.  16),  have  perished.  Who 
will  deny  that  in  these  Paul  also  was  inspired  ? 

Wherefore,  we  conclude  that  the  opinion  which  maintains 
the  possibility  and  the  actuality  of  the  loss  of  inspired  writings, 
rests  on  convincing  data. 

Chapter  XVII. 
The  Hebrew  Text  of  the  Old  Testament. 

All  the  protocanonical  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  except 
some  Chaldaic  fragments  of  Ezra  and  Daniel,  were  written  in 
Hebrew.* 

Of  the  deuterocanonical  books,  Wisdom  and  11.  Maccabees 
were  originally  written  in  Greek  ;  Ecclesiasticus  was  written  in 
Hebrew,  but  the  text  has  perished.  Jerome  saw  the  Hebrew 
text  of  I.  Maccabees,  but  this  has  also  perished.  It  is  not 
certain  whether  the  others  were  originally  written  in  Hebrew 
or  Chaldaic. 

Concerning  the  history  of  the  Hebrew  language,  we  have 
thought  good  to  excerpt  from  Home's  Introduction  to  Holy 
Scripture,  Vol.  II.  In  dealing  with  the  criticism  of  the  text 
of  the  Old  Testament,  we  shall  frequently  excerpt  material 
from  this  author,  with  the  alterations  which  we  shall  judge  to 
be  good. 

The  languages  of  Western  Asia,  though  differing  in  respect 
to  dialect,  are  radically  the  same,  and  have  been  so,  as  far 
back  as  any  historical  records  enable  us  to  trace  them.  Pales- 
tine, Syria,  Phoenicia,  Mesopotamia,  Babylonia,  Arabia,  and 
also  Ethiopia  are  reckoned  as  the  countries,  where  the  lan- 
guages commonly  denominated  Oriental  have  been  spoken. 
Of  late,  many  critics  have  rejected  the  appellation  "■Oriental" 
as  being  too  comprehensive,  and  have  substituted  that  of 
"■  Shemitish"  a  denominative  derived  from  Shem.  Against 
this  appellation,  however,  objections  of  a  similar  nature  may 
be  urged  ;  for  no  inconsiderable  portion  of  those,  who  spoke 

*0f  Daniel,  the  portion  from  tlie  fourth  verse  of  second  chapter,  to  the 
twenty-eighth  verse  of  seventh  chapter,  was  written  in  Chaldaic.  Of  Ezra, 
the  portions  from  I.  Ezra  IV.  8,  to  VI.  18,  and  from  the  twelfth  to  the 
twenty-sixth  verse  of  seventh  chapter  were  written  in  Chaldaic. 


880         THE  HEBREW  TEXT  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

the  languages  in  question,  were  not  descendants  of  Shem.  It 
is  a  matter  of  indifference  which  appellation  is  used,  if  it  be 
first  defined. 

The  Oriental  Languages  may  be  divided  into  three  princi- 
pal dialects,  viz.,  the  Aramaean,  the  Hebrew,  and  the  Arabic. 

I. — The  Aramaean,  spoken  in  Syria,  Mesopotamia,  and 
Babylonia  or  Chaldaea,  is  subdivided  into  the  Syriac  and 
Chaldee  dialects  ;  or,  as  they  are  sometimes  called,  the  East 
and  West  Aramaean. 

2. — The  Hebrew  or  Canaanitish  (Isa.  XIX.  i8.)  was  spoken 
in  Palestine,  and  probably  with  little  variation  in  Phoenicia, 
and  the  Phoenician  colonies,  as  at  Carthage  and  other  places. 
The  names  of  the  Phoenician  and  Punic  dialects  are  too  few, 
and  too  much  disfigured,  to  enable  us  to  judge  with  certainty 
how  extensively  these  languages  were  the  same  as  the  dialect 
of  Palestine. 

3. — The  Arabic,  to  which  the  Ethiopic  bears  a  special  re- 
semblance, has,  in  modern  times,  a  great  variety  of  dialects,  as 
a  spoken  language,  and  is  spread  over  a  vast  extent  of  country. 
But,  so  far  as  we  are  acquainted  with  its  former  state,  it 
appears  more  anciently  to  have  been  principally  limited  to 
Arabia  and  Ethiopia. 

The  Arabic  is  very  rich  in  forms  and  words :  the  Syriac,  so 
far  as  it  is  yet  known,  is  comparatively  limited  in  both  ;  the 
Hebrew  holds  a  middle  place  between  them,  both  as  to  copious- 
ness of  words  and  variety  of  forms. 

Besides  the  preceding  dialects,  there  are  many  slighter 
variations  of  language,  sometimes  distinguished  from  the 
general  names  by  local  appellations.  Thus,  the  Ephraimites 
could  not  distinguish  between  the  letters  D  (s)  and  "^  (sh),  as 
the  Hebrews  did,  in  speaking:  hence  the  Ephraimites  pro- 
nounced S/bboleth  instead  of  S^z'bboleth.  (Judges  XII.  6.) 
Nehemiah  was  indignant,  that  part  of  his  countrymen  should 
speak  the  language  of  Ashdod.     (Neh.  XIII.  23 — ^5.) 

The  Samaritan  Dialect  appears  to  be  composed  (as  one 
might  expect,  see  II.  Kings  XVII.)  of  Aramaean  and  Hebrew : 
and  the  slighter  varieties  of  Arabic  are  as  numerous  as  the 
provinces  where  the  language  is  spoken. 

Numerous  appellations  have,  at  different  times,  been  given 
to  the  Hebrew  language.  In  the  Scriptures  it  is  nowhere  called 
Hebrew.  This  term,  as  it  is  used  in  John  V.  2,  and  in  several 
other  passages  in  the  New  Testament,  does  not  refer  to  the 
biblical  Hebrew,  but  to  the  Syro-Chaldaic  dialect  prevalent  in 
Palestine  in  the  time  of  Jesus  Christ.     In  II.  Kings  XVIII.  26. 


THE   HEBREW   TEXT   OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT.  381 

it  is  called  the  language  of  the  Jews.  In  the  Targums  or 
Chaldee  Paraphrases  of  the  Old  Testament,  the  appellation — 
holy  tongue — is  first  applied  to  it :  but  the  name,  by  which  it  is 
usually  distinguished,  is  Hebrew,  as  being  the  language  of  the 
Hebrew  nation. 

Concerning  the  origin  of  this  name,  there  has  been  con- 
siderable difference  of  opinion.  According  to  some  critics,  it 
derived  its  name  from  Heber,  one  of  the  descendants  of  Shem 
(Gen.  X.  21.  25.  XI.  14.  16,  17.):  but  other  learned  men  are  of 
opinion  that  it  is  derived  from  the  root  *1^^  (ab^r),  to  pass 
over,  whence  Abraham  was  denominated  the  Hebrew  (Gen. 
XIV.  13.),  having  passed  over  the  river  Euphrates  to  come  into 
the  land  of  Canaan.  This  last  opinion  appears  to  be  best 
founded,  from  the  general  fact  that  the  most  ancient  names  of 
nations  were  appellative.  But,  whatever  extent  of  meaning 
was  attached  to  the  appellation  Hebrew,  before  the  time  of 
Jacob,  it  appears  afterwards  to  have  been  limited  only  to  his 
posterity,  and  to  be  synonymous  with  Israelite. 

The  origin  of  the  Hebrew  language  must  be  dated  farther 
back  than  the  period,  to  which  we  can  trace  the  appellation 
Hebrew.  It  is  plain,  from  the  names  of  persons  and  places  in 
Canaan,  that,  wherever  Abraham  sojourned,  he  found  a 
language  in  which  he  could  easily  converse,  viz.,  the  Hebrew 
or  Phoenician  language.  That  this  was  originally  the  language 
of  Palestine,  is  evident  from  the  names  of  nations  being 
appellative,  and  from  other  facts  in  respect  to  the  formation  of 
this  dialect.  Thus,  the  West  is,  in  Hebrew,  Qi,  which  means 
the  sea,  that  is,  towards  the  Mediterranean  Sea.  As  the 
Hebrew  has  no  other  proper  word  for  west,  so  it  must  be 
evident  that  the  language,  in  its  distinctive  and  peculiar 
forms,  must  have  been  formed  in  Palestine. 

The  Jewish  Rabbins,  Jonathan  the  author  of  the  Chaldee 
Paraphrase,  Solomon  Jarchi,  and  Aben-Ezra,  have  affirmed  that 
Hebrew  was  the  primitive  language  spoken  in  Paradise  ;  and 
their  opinion  has  been  adopted  by  Origen,  Jerome,  Augustine, 
and  some  other  Fathers,  as  well  as  by  some  modern  critics  and 
philologers.  Huet,  however,  and  the  majority  of  modern 
critics,  are  of  opinion,  that  the  language  spoken  by  Adam 
perished  in  the  confusion  of  tongues  at  Babel.  But  it  seems 
highly  probable,  that  if  the  original  parents  of  mankind  were 
placed  in  Western  Asia,  they  spoke  substantially  the  language 
which  has  for  more  than  fifty  centuries  pervaded  that  country. 
Wherefore,  from  internal  evidence,  and  from  the  biblical  ac- 
count, we  believe  that  Hebrew  has  preserved  in  the  main  the 


382  THE   HEBREW  TEXT  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

substance  of  the  original  language  of  mankind.  We  feel  war- 
ranted in  asserting  that,  in  the  confusion  of  tongues,  the  Hebrew 
remained  substantially  the  old  radical  tongue,  and  that  the 
divers  tongues  were  formed  in  the  dispersion,  not  by  destroying 
the  original  Hebrew  word,  but  by  forming  other  languages, 
whose  radical  affinity  with  the  Hebrew  was  not  sufficient  to 
make  the  speech  of  the  nations  intelligible  to  each  other.  We 
believe  that  some  affinity  with  Hebrew  is  traceable  in  all  the 
languages  of  the  human  race.  At  times  this  will  be  faint,  for 
the  reason  that  the  change,  in  the  dispersion,  was  substantial ; 
and,  secondly,  language  is  a  living  growth,  and  man  will  exer- 
cise his  aptitude  for  speech  by  creating  new  words,  and  chang- 
ing the  old  ones  to  correspond  to  his  ever-changing  relations 
with  nature.  The  language  faculty  of  man  continually  moulds 
into  articulate  speech  some  reflection  of  nature,  and  thus  the 
languages  of  men  have  grown  away  from  their  original  affinity 
with  the  root-language. 

Various  circumstances,  indeed,  combine  to  prove  that 
Hebrew  is  in  the  main  the  original  language.  It  is  of  all  lan- 
guages that  one  which  comes  closest  to  nature.  The  words 
of  which  it  is  composed  are  very  short,  and  admit  of 
very  little  flection,  as  may  be  seen  on  reference  to  any 
Hebrew  grammar  or  lexicon.  The  names  of  persons  and 
places  are  descriptive  of  their  nature,  situation,  accidental 
circumstances,  &c.  The  names  of  brutes  express  their 
nature  and  properties  more  significantly  and  more  accu- 
rately than  any  other  known  language  in  the  world.  The 
names  also  of  various  ancient  nations  are  of  Hebrew  origin, 
being  derived  from  the  sons  or  grandsons  of  Shem,  Ham,  and 
Japhet :  as,  the  Assyrians  from  Ashur ;  the  Elamites  from 
Elam ;  the  Aramaeans  from  Aram ;  the  Lydians  from  Lud ; 
the  Cimbrians  or  Cimmerians  from  Gomer ;  the  Medians  from 
Madai,  the  son  of  Japhet ;  the  lonians  from  Javan,  &c. 
Further  the  names  given  to  the  heathen  deities  suggest  an 
additional  proof  of  the  antiquity  and  originality  of  the  Hebrew 
language :  thus,  Japetus  is  derived  from  Japhet ;  Jove,  from 
Jahve  ;  Vulcan,  from  Tubal-Cain,  who  first  discovered  the 
use  of  iron  and  brass,  &c.,  &c.  Lastly,  the  traces  of  Hebrew 
which  are  to  be  found  in  very  many  other  languages,  and  which 
have  been  noticed  by  several  learned  men,  afford  another  argu- 
ment in  favor  of  its  antiquity  and  priority.  These  vestiges  are 
particularly  conspicuous  in  the  Chaldee,  Syriac,  Arabic,  Persian 
Phoenician,  and  other  languages  spoken  by  the  people  who  dwelt 
nearestto  Babylon,  where  the  firstdivision  of  languagestookplace. 


THE  HEBREW  TEXT  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT.  383 

The  knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  language  was  diffused  very 
widely  by  the  Phtenician  merchants,  who  had  factories  and 
colonies  on  almost  every  coast  of  Europe  and  Asia :  that  it 
was  identically  the  same  as  was  spoken  in  Canaan,  or  Phoeni- 
cia, is  evident  from  its  being  used  by  the  inhabitants  of  that 
country  from  the  time  of  Abraham  to  that  of  Joshua,  who 
gave  to  places  mentioned  in  the  Old  Testament,  appellations 
which  are  pure  Hebrew;  such  are  Kiriathsepher,  or  the  city  of 
books,  and  Kiriath-sannah,  or  the  city  of  learning.  (Josh.  XV. 
15.  49.).  Another  proof  of  the  identity  of  the  two  languages 
arises  from  the  circumstance  of  the  Hebrews  conversing  with 
the  Canaanites,  without  an  interpreter;  as  the  spies  sent  by 
Joshua,  with  Rahab  (Josh.  H.);  the  ambassadors  sent  by  the 
Gibeonites  to  Joshua  (Josh.  IX.  3 — 25.),  &c.  But  a  still 
stronger  proof  of  the  identity  of  the  two  languages  is  to  be 
found  in  the  fragments  of  the  Punic  tongue,  which  occur  in  the 
writings  of  ancient  authors.  That  the  Carthaginians  (Pceni) 
derived  their  name,  origin,  and  language  from  the  Phoenicians, 
is  a  well-known  and  authenticated  fact ;  and  that  the  latter 
sprang  from  the  Canaanites  might  easily  be  shown  from  the 
situation  of  their  country,  as  well  as  from  their  manners, 
customs,  and  ordinances.  Not  to  cite  the  testimonies  of  pro- 
fane authors  on  this  point,  which  have  been  accumulated  by 
Walton,  we  have  sufficient  evidence  to  prove  that  they 
were  considered  as  the  same  people,  in  the  fact  of  the  Phoeni- 
cians and  Canaanites  being  used  promiscuously  to  denote  the 
inhabitants  of  the  same  country.  Compare  Exod.  VI.  15.  with 
Gen.  XLVI.  10.  and  Exod.  XVI.  35.  with  Josh.  V.  12.,  in 
which  passages,  for  the  Hebrew  words  translated  Canaanitish 
and  land  of  Canaan,  the  Septuagint  reads  Phoenician,  and  the 
country  of  Phoenicia. 

The  period  from  the  age  of  Moses  to  that  of  David  has 
been  considered  the  golden  age  of  the  Hebrew  language,  which 
declined  in  purity  from  that  time  to  the  reign  of  Hezekiah  or 
Manasseh,  having  received  several  foreign  words  from  the  com- 
mercial and  political  intercourse  of  the  Jews  and  Israelites  with 
the  Assyrians  and  Babylonians.  This  period  has  been  termed 
the  silver  age  of  the  Hebrew  language.  In  the  interval  be- 
tween the  reign  of  Hezekiah  and  the  Babylonish  captivity,  the 
purity  of  the  language  was  neglected,  and  so  many  foreign 
words  were  introduced  into  it,  that  this  period  has,  not  in- 
aptly, been  designated  its  iron  age.  During  the  seventy  years' 
captivity,  though  it  does  not  appear  that  the  Hebrews  entirely 
lost  their  native  tongue,  yet  it  underwent  so  considerable  a 


384         THE  HEBREW  TEXT  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

change  from  their  adoption  of  the  vernacular  languages  of  the 
countries  where  they  had  resided,  that  afterwards,  on  their 
return  from  exile,  they  spoke  a  dialect  of  Chaldee  mixed  with 
Hebrew  words.  On  this  account  it  was,  that,  when  the 
Hebrew  Scriptures  were  read,  it  was  found  necessary  to  inter- 
pret them  to  the  people  in  the  Chaldaean  language ;  as,  when 
Ezra,  the  scribe,  brought  the  book  of  the  law  of  Moses  before 
the  congregation,  the  Levites  are  said  to  have  caused  the 
people  to  understand  the  law,  because  they  read  in  the  book,  in 
the  law  of  God,  distinctly,  AND  GAVE  THE  SENSE,  AND  CAUSED 
THEM    TO    UNDERSTAND    THE    READING.        (Neh.     VHI.     9.) 

Some  time  after  the  return  from  the  great  captivity,  Hebrew 
ceased  to  be  spoken  altogether:  though  it  continued  to  be 
cultivated  and  studied,  by  the  priests  and  Levites,  as  a  learned 
language  that  they  might  be  enabled  to  expound  the  law  and 
the  prophets  to  the  people,  who,  it  appears  from  the  New 
Testament,  were  well  acquainted  with  their  general  contents 
and  tenor ;  this  last-mentioned  period  has  been  called  the 
leaden  age  of  the  language.  "  How  long  the  Hebrew  was  re- 
tained, both  in  writing  and  conversation  ;  or  in  writing,  after  it 
ceased  to  be  the  language  of  conversation,  it  is  impossible  to 
determine.  The  coins,  stamped  in  the  time  of  the  Maccabees, 
are  all  the  oriental  monuments  we  have,  of  the  period  that 
elapsed  between  the  latest  canonical  writers,  and  the  advent 
of  Christ ;  and  the  inscriptions  on  these  are  in  Hebrew.  At 
the  time  of  Maccabees,  Hebrew  was  probably  understood, 
at  least,  as  the  language  of  books :  perhaps,  in  some  measure, 
also,  among  the  better  informed,  as  the  language  of  conver- 
sation. But  soon  after  this,  the  dominion  of  the  Seleucidae, 
in  Syria,  over  the  Jewish  nation,  uniting  with  the  former 
influence  of  the  Babylonish  captivity,  in  promoting  the  Ara- 
maean dialect,  appears  to  have  destroyed  the  remains  of  proper 
Hebrew,  as  a  living  language  and  to  have  universally  substi- 
tuted, in  its  stead,  the  Hebraeo-Aramaean,  as  it  was  spoken,  in 
the  time  of  our  Saviour.  From  the  time  when  Hebrew  ceased 
to  be  vernacular,  down  to  the  present  day,  a  portion  of  this 
dialect  has  been  preserved  in  the  Old  Testament.  It  has  al- 
ways been  the  subject  of  study  among  learned  Jews.  Before 
and  at  the  time  of  Christ,  there  were  flourishing  Jewish  acade- 
mies at  Jerusalem;  especially  under  Hillel  and  Shammai. 
After  Jerusalem  was  destroyed,  schools  were  set  up  in  various 
places,  but  particularly  they  flourished  at  Tiberias,  until  the 
death  of  R.  Judah,  surnamed  Hakkodesh  or  the  Holy,  the 
author  of  the  Mishna  ;  about  A.  D.  230.     Some  of  his  pupils 


THE   HEBREW   TEXT   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT.  386 

set  up  Other  schools  in  Babylonia,  which  became  the  rivals  of 
these.  The  Babylonian  academies  flourished  until  near  the 
tenth  century."  From  the  academies  at  Tiberias  and  in  Baby- 
lonia, we  have  received  the  Targums,  the  Talmud,  the  Masora 
(of  all  which  an  account  will  be  found  in  the  course  of  the  pre- 
sent volume),  and  the  written  vowels  and  accents  of  the 
Hebrew  language.  The  Hebrew  of  the  Talmud  and  of  the 
Rabbins  has  a  close  affinity  with  the  later  Hebrew ;  especially 
the  first  and  earliest  part  of  it,  the  Mishna. 

The  present  Hebrew  Characters,  or  Letters,  are  twenty-two 
in  number,  and  of  a  square  form  :  but  the  antiquity  of  these 
letters  is  a  point  that  has  been  most  severely  contested  by 
many  learned  men.  From  a  passage  in  Eusebius's  Chronicle, 
and  another  in  Jerome,  it  was  inferred  by  Joseph  Scaliger,  that 
Ezra,  when  he  reformed  the  Jewish  church,  transcribed  the 
ancient  characters  of  the  Hebrews  into  the  square  letters  of 
the  Chaldaeans :  and  that  this  was  done  for  the  use  of  those 
Jews,  who,  being  born  during  the  captivity,  knew  no  other  al- 
phabet than  that  of  the  people  among  whom  they  had  been 
educated.  Consequently,  the  old  character,  which  we  call  the 
Samaritan,  fell  into  total  disuse.  This  opinion  Scaliger  sup- 
ported by  passages  from  both  the  Talmuds,  as  well  as  from 
rabbinical  writers,  in  which  it  is  expressly  affirmed  that  such 
characters  were  adopted  by  Ezra.  But  the  most  decisive  con- 
firmation of  this  point  is  to  be  found  in  the  ancient  Hebrew 
coins,  which  were  struck  before  the  captivity,  and  even  previ- 
ously to  the  revolt  of  the  ten  tribes.  The  characters  engraven 
on  all  of  them  are  manifestly  the  same  with  the  modern  Sama- 
ritan, though  with  some  trifling  variations  in  their  forms,  occa- 
sioned by  the  depredations  of  time.  These  coins,  whether 
shekels  or  half  shekels,  have  all  of  them,  on  one  side,  the 
golden  manna-pot  (mentioned  in  Exod.  XVI,  32,  33.),  and  on 
its  mouth,  or  over  the  top  of  it,  most  of  them  have  a  Samaritan 
Aleph,  some  an  Aleph  and  Schin,  or  other  letters,  with  this 
inscription.  The  Shekel  of  Israel,  in  Samaritan  characters.  On 
the  opposite  side  is  to  be  seen  Aaron's  rod  with  almonds,  and 
in  the  same  letters  this  inscription,  Jerusalem  the  holy.  Other 
coins  are  extant  with  somewhat  different  inscriptions,  but  the 
same  characters  are  engraven  on  them  all. 

The  opinion  originally  produced  by  Scaliger,  and  thus 
decisively  corroborated  by  coins,  has  been  adopted  by  Casau- 
bon,  Vossius,  Grotius,  Walton,  Louis  Cappel,  Prideaux,  and 
other  eminent  biblical  critics  and  philologers,  and  is  now 
generally  received :  it  was,  however,  very  strenuously  though 


386  THE   HEBREW   TEXT  OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

unsuccessfully  opposed  by  the  younger  Buxtorf,  who  endea- 
vored to  prove,  by  a  variety  of  passages  from  rabbinical  writ- 
ers, that  both  the  square  and  the  Samaritan  characters  were 
anciently  used;  the  present  square  character  being  that  in 
which  the  tables  of  the  law,  and  the  copy  deposited  by  the  ark, 
were  written ;  and  the  other  characters  being  employed  in  the 
copies  of  the  law  which  were  made  for  private  and  common 
use,  and  in  civil  affairs  in  general ;  and  that,  after  the  captiv- 
ity, Ezra  enjoined  the  former  to  be  used  by  the  Jews  on  all 
occasions,  leaving  the  latter  to  the  Samaritans  and  apostates. 
Independently,  however,  of  the  strong  evidence  against  Bux- 
torf's  hypothesis,  which  is  afforded  by  the  ancient  Hebrew 
coins,  when  we  consider  the  implacable  enmity  that  existed 
between  the  Jews  and  Samaritans,  is  it  likely  that  the  one 
copied  from  the  other,  or  that  the  former  preferred,  to  the 
beautiful  letters  used  by  their  ancestors,  the  rude  and  inelegant 
characters  of  their  most  detested  rivals?  And  when  the  vast 
difference  between  the  Chaldee  (or  square)  and  the  Samaritan 
letters,  with  respect  to  convenience  and  beauty,  is  calmly  con- 
sidered, it  must  be  acknowledged  that  they  never  could  have 
been  used  at  the  same  time.  After  all,  it  is  of  no  great 
moment  which  of  these,  or  whether  either  of  them,  were  the 
original  characters,  since  it  does  not  appear  that  any  change  of 
the  words  has  arisen  from  the  manner  of  writing  them,  because 
the  Samaritan  and  Hebrew  Pentateuchs  almost  always  agree, 
notwithstanding  the  lapse  of  so  many  ages.  It  is  most  prob- 
able that  the  form  of  these  characters  has  varied  at  different 
periods:  this  appears  from  the  direct  testimony  of  Montfaucon, 
and  is  implied  in  Kenicott's  making  the  characters,  in  which 
manuscripts  are  written,  one  test  of  their  age.  It  is,  how- 
ever, certain  that  the  Chaldee  or  square  character  was  the 
common  one:  as  in  Matt.  V.  i8.  the  yod  is  referred  to  as  the 
smallest  letter  in  the  alphabet.  It  is  highly  probable  that  it 
was  the  common  character,  when  the  Septuagint  version  was 
made ;  because  the  departures  in  the  Hebrew  text  from  that 
version,  so  far  as  they  have  respect  to  the  letters,  can  mostly 
be  accounted  for,  on  the  ground,  that  the  square  characters 
were  then  used,  and  that  the  final  letters  which  vary  from  the 
medial  or  initial  form,  were  then  wanting. 

But  however  interesting  these  inquiries  may  be  in  a  philo- 
logical point  of  view,  it  is  of  far  greater  importance  to  be  satis- 
fied concerning  the  much  litigated,  and  yet  undecided,  question 
respecting  the  antiquity  of  the  Hebrew  points ;  because,  unless 
the  student  has  determined  for  himself,  after  a  mature  investi- 


THE   HEBREW   TEXT   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT.  387 

gation,  he  cannot  with  confidence  apply  to  the  study  of  this 
sacred  language. 

Three  opinions  have  been  offered  by  learned  men  on  this 
subject.  By  some,  the  origin  of  the  Hebrew  vowel  points  is 
maintained  to  be  coeval  with  the  Hebrew  language  itself : 
while  others  assert  them  to  have  been  first  introduced  by  Ezra 
after  the  Babylonian  captivity.  A  third  hypothesis  is,  that 
they  were  invented,  about  five  hundred  years  after  Christ, 
by  the  doctors  of  the  school  of  Tiberias,  for  the  purpose 
of  marking  and  establishing  the  genuine  pronunciation,  for 
the  convenience  of  those  who  were  learning  the  Hebrew 
tongue. 

This  opinion,  first  announced  by  Rabbi  Elias  Levita 
in  the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century,  has  been  adopt- 
ed by  Cappel,  Casaubon,  Scaliger,  Masclef,  Erpenius,  Hou- 
bigant,  L'Advocat,  Walton,  Hare,  Lowth,  Kennicott,  Geddes, 
and  other  eminent  critics,  and  is  now  generally  received, 
although  some  few  writers  of  respectability  continue 
strenuously  to  advocate  their  antiquity.  The  Arcanum 
Punctationis  Revelatum  of  Cappel  was  opposed  by  Buxtorf 
in  a  treatise  De  Punctorum  Vocalium  Antiquitate,  by  whom 
the  controversy  was  almost  exhausted. 

That  the  vowel  points  are  of  modern  date,  and  of  human 
invention,  rests  upon  the  following  considerations: 

I. — **  The  kindred  Semitic  languages  anciently  had  no 
written  vowels.  The  most  ancient  Estrangelo  and  Kufish 
characters,  that  is,  the  ancient  characters  of  the  Syrians  and 
Arabians,  were  destitute  of  vowels.  The  Palmyrene  inscrip- 
tions, and  nearly  all  the  Phenician  ones,  are  destitute  of  them. 
Some  of  the  Maltese  inscriptions,  however,  and  a  few  of  the 
Phenician  have  marks,  which  probably  were  intended  as 
vowels.  The  Koran  was  confessedly  destitute  of  them,  at 
first.  The  punctuation  of  it  occasioned  great  dispute  among 
Mohammedans.  In  some  of  the  older  Syriac  writings  is  found 
a  single  point,  which,  by  being  placed  in  different  positions  in 
regard  to  words,  served  as  a  diacritical  sign.  The  present 
vowel  system  of  the  Syrians  was  introduced  so  late  as  the  time 
of  Theophilus  and  Jacob  of  Edessa.  (VHI.  Cent.)  The  Arabic 
vowels  were  adopted  soon  after  the  Koran  was  written ; 
but  their  other  diacritical  marks  did  not  come  into 
use  until  they  were  introduced  by  Ibn   Mokla  (about  A.  D. 

900),  together  with   the    Nishi    character,   now    in    common 

_  »» 
use. 


388         THE   HEBREW  TEXT  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

2. — The  Samaritan  letters,  which  (we  have  already  seen) 
were  the  same  with  the  Hebrew  characters  before  the  captivity, 
have  no  points ;  nor  are  there  any  vestiges  whatever  of  vowel 
points  to  be  traced,  either  in  the  shekels  struck  by  the  kings 
of  Israel,  or  in  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch.  The  words  have 
always  been  read  by  the  aid  of  the  four  letters,  Aleph,  He, 
Vau,  and  Jod,  which  are  called  matres  lectionis,  or  mothers  of 
reading. 

3. — The  copies  of  the  Scriptures  used  in  the  Jewish  syna- 
gogues to  the  present  time,  and  which  are  accounted  particu- 
larly sacred,  are  constantly  written  without  points,  or  any 
distinctions  of  verses  whatever:  a  practice  that  could  never 
have  been  introduced,  nor  would  it  have  been  so  religiously 
followed,  if  vowel  points  had  been  coeval  with  the  language, 
or  of  divine  authority.  To  this  fact  we  may  add,  that  in  many 
of  the  oldest  and  best  manuscripts,  collated  and  examined  by 
Kennicott,  either  there  are  no  points  at  all,  or  they  are 
evidently  a  late  addition  ;  and  that  all  the  ancient  various 
readings  marked  by  the  Jews,  regard  only  the  letters  ;  not  one 
of  them  relates  to  the  vowel  points,  which  could  not  have 
happened  if  these  had  been  in  use. 

4. — Rabbi  Elias  Levita  ascribes  the  invention  of  vowel 
points  to  the  doctors  of  Tiberias,  and  has  confirmed  the  fact 
by  the  authority  of  the  most  learned  rabbins. 

5. — The  ancient  Cabbalists  draw  all  their  mysteries  from  the 
letters,  but  none  from  the  vowel  points,  which  they  could  not 
have  neglected  if  they  had  been  acquainted  with  them.  And, 
hence  it  is  concluded,  that  the  points  were  not  in  existence 
when  the  Cabbalistic  interpretations  were  made. 

6. — Although  the  Talmud  contains  the  determinations  of 
the  Jewish  doctors  concerning  many  passages  of  the  law,  it  is 
evident  that  the  points  were  not  affixed  to  the  text  when  the 
Talmud  was  composed ;  because  there  are  several  disputes 
concerning  the  sense  of  passages  of  the  law,  which  could  not 
have  been  controverted  if  the  points  had  then  been  in  exist- 
ence. Besides,  the  vowel  points  are  never  mentioned,  though 
the  fairest  opportunity  for  noticing  them  offered  itself,  if  they 
had  really  then  been  in  use.  The  compilation  of  the  Talmud 
was  not  finished  until  the  sixth  century. 

7. — The  ancient  various  readings,  called  Keri  and  Ketib,  or 
Khetibh  (which  were  collected  a  short  time  before  the  com- 
pletion of  the  Talmud),  relate  entirely  to  consonants,  and  not 
to  vowel  points  ;  yet,  if  these  had  existed  in  manuscript  at 
the  time  the  Keri  and  Khetib  were  collected,  it  is  obvious  that 


THE   HEBREW   TEXT   OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT.  389 

some  reference  would  directly  or  indirectly  have  been  made  to 
them.  The  silence,  therefore,  of  the  collectors  of  these  various 
readings  is  a  clear  proof  of  the  non-existence  of  vowel  points 
in  their  time. 

8. — The  ancient  versions — for  instance,  the  Chaldee  para- 
phrases of  Jonathan  and  Onkelos,  and  the  Greek  versions  of 
Aquila,  Symmachus,  and  Theodotion,  but  especially  the  Sep- 
tuagint  version — all  read  the  text,  in  many  passages,  in  senses 
different  from  that  which  the  points  determine  them  to  mean. 
Whence,  it  is  evident,  that  if  the  points  had  then  been  known, 
pointed  manuscripts  would  have  been  followed  as  the  most 
correct ;  but  as  the  authors  of  those  versions  did  not  use  them, 
it  is  a  plain  proof  that  the  points  were  not  then  in  being. 

9, — The  ancient  Jewish  writers  themselves  are  totally  silent 
concerning  the  vowel  points,  which  surely  would  not  have 
been  the  case  if  they  had  been  acquainted  with  them.  Much 
stress,  indeed,  has  been  laid  upon  the  books  of  Zohar  and 
Bahir,  but  these  have  been  proved  not  to  have  been  known 
for  a  thousand  years  after  the  birth  of  Christ.  Even  Buxtorf 
himself  admits,  that  the  book  Zohar  could  not  have  been 
written  till  after  the  tenth  century ;  and  the  rabbis,  Gedaliah 
and  Zachet,  confess  that  it  was  not  mentioned  before  the  year 
1290,  and  that  it  presents  internal  evidence  that  it  is  of  a  much 
later  date  than  is  intended.  It  is  no  uncommon  practice  of 
the  Jews  to  publish  books  of  recent  date  under  the  names  of 
old  writers,  in  order  to  render  their  authority  respectable,  and 
even  to  alter  and  interpolate  ancient  writers  in  order  to  sub- 
serve their  own  views. 

10. — Equally  silent  are  the  ancient  Fathers  of  the  Christian 
Church,  Origen  and  Jerome.  In  some  fragments  still  extant, 
of  Origen's  vast  biblical  work,  entitled  the  Hexapla  (of  which 
some  account  is  given  in  a  subsequent  page),  we  have  a  speci- 
men of  the  manner  in  which  Hebrew  was  pronounced  in  the 
third  century  ;  and  which,  it  appears,  was  widely  different  from 
that  which  results  from  adopting  the  Masoretic  reading. 
Jerome,  also,  in  various  parts  of  his  works,  where  he  notices 
the  different  pronunciations  of  Hebrew  words,  treats  only  of 
the  letters,  and  nowhere  mentions  the  points,  which  he  surely 
would  have  done,  had  they  been  found  in  the  copies  consulted 
by  him. 

1 1 . — The  letters  ^,  X^t  \  ^t  (Aleph,  He,  Vau,  and  Yod,)  upon 
the  plan  of  the  Masorites,  are  termed  quiescent,  because,  ac- 
cording to  them,  they  have  no  sound.  At  other  times,  these 
same  letters  indicate  a  variety  of  sounds,  as  the  fancy  of  these 


390  THE   HEBREW   TEXT   OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

critics  has  been  pleased  to  distinguish  them  by  points.  This 
single  circumstance  exhibits  the  whole  doctrine  of  points  as 
the  baseless  fabric  of  a  vision.  To  suppress  altogether,  or  to 
render  insignificant,  a  radical  letter  of  any  word,  in  order  to 
supply  its  place  by  an  arbitrary  dot  or  a  fictitious  mark,  is  an 
invention  fraught  with  the  grossest  absurdity. 

12. — Lastly,  as  the  first  vestiges  of  the  points  that  can  be 
traced  are  to  be  found  in  the  writings  of  Rabbi  Ben  Asher, 
president  of  the  Western  School,  and  of  Rabbi  Ben  Naphthali, 
chief  of  the  Eastern  School,  who  flourished  about  the  middle 
of  the  tenth  century,  we  are  justified  in  assigning  that  as  the 
epoch  when  the  system  of  vowel  points  was  established. 

Such  are  the  evidences  on  which  the  majority  of  the  learned 
rest  their  convictions  of  the  modern  date  of  the  Hebrew  points. 

Besides  the  vowel  points,  the  antiquity  of  which  has  been 
considered  in  the  preceding  pages,  we  meet  in  pointed  Hebrew 
Bibles  with  other  marks  or  signs,  termed  ACCENTS  ;  the  system 
of  which  is  inseparably  connected  with  the  present  state  of  the 
vowel  points,  inasmuch  as  these  points  are  often  changed  in 
consequence  of  the  accents.  The  latter,  therefore,  must  have 
originated  contemporaneously  with  the  written  vowels,  at 
least,  with  the  completion  of  the  vowel  system.  Respecting 
the  design  of  the  accents,  there  has  been  great  dispute  among 
Hebrew  grammarians.  Professor  Stuart,  who  has  discussed 
this  subject  most  copiously  in  his  valuable  Hebrew  Grammar, 
is  of  opinion  that  they  were  designed,  not  to  mark  the  tone- 
syllable  of  a  word  or  the  interpunction,  but  to  regulate  the 
cantillation  of  the  Scriptures.  It  is  well  known  that  the  Jews, 
from  time  immemorial,  in  the  public  reading  of  the  Scriptures, 
have  cantillated  them,  that  is,  read  in  a  kind  of  half  singing  or 
recitative  way.  In  this  manner,  most  probably,  the  Ethiopian 
eunuch  was  reading  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah,  when  he  was  over- 
heard and  interrogated  by  Philip.  (Acts  VIII.  30.)  In  this 
manner,  also,  Mussulmen  read  the  Koran  ;  and  the  people  of 
the  East  generally  deliver  public  discourses  in  this  way.  The  mode 
of  cantillating  Hebrew  in  different  countries  is  at  present  vari- 
ous, but  guided  in  all  by  the  accents;  that  is,  the  accents  are  used 
as  musical  notes,  though  various  powers  are  assigned  to  them. 

The  Aramaean  language  derives  its  name  from  the  very 
extensive  region  of  Aram,  in  which  it  was  anciently  vernacular. 
As  that  region  extended  from  the  Mediterranean  sea  through 
Syria  and  Mesopotamia,  beyond  the  river  Tigris,  the  language 
there  spoken  necessarily  diverged  into  various  dialects ;  the 
two  principal  of  which  are  the  Chaldee  and  the  Syriac. 


THE   HEBREW   TEXT   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT.  391 

The  Chaldee,  sometimes  called  by  way  of  distinction  the 
East-Aramaan  dialect,  was  formerly  spoken  in  the  province  of 
Babylonia,  between  the  Euphrates  and  the  Tigris,  the  original 
inhabitants  of  which  cultivated  this  language  as  a  distinct  dia- 
lect, and  communicated  it  to  the  Jews  during  the  Babylonian 
captivity.  By  means  of  the  Jews  it  was  transplanted  into  Pa- 
lestine, where  it  gradually  became  the  vernacular  tongue ; 
though  it  did  not  completely  displace  the  old  Hebrew  until 
the  time  of  the  Maccabees.  Although  the  Aramaean,  as  spoken 
by  Jews,  partook  somewhat  of  the  Hebrew  character,  no  entire 
or  very  important  corruption  of  it  took  place  ;  and  to  this  cir- 
cumstance alone  the  Babylonians  are  indebted  for  the  survival, 
or  at  least  the  partial  preservation,  of  their  language,  which, 
even  in  the  mother-country,  has,  since  the  spread  of  Moham- 
medism,  been  totally  extinct. 

The  principal  remains  of  the  Chaldee  dialect  now  extant 
will  be  found : 

(i.) — In  the  Canonical  Books,  Ezra  IV.  8.  to  VI.  i8.  and 
VII,  12 — 16.  Jer.  X.  2.,  and  Dan.  II.  4.  to  the  end  of  chapter 
VII.;  and 

(2.) — In  the  Targums  or  Chaldee  Paraphrases  of  the  Books 
of  the  Old  Testament. 

The  Syriac  or  West-Aramaean  was  spoken  both  in  Syria 
and  Mesopotamia  ;  and,  after  the  captivity,  it  became  vernacu- 
lar in  Galilee.  Hence,  though  several  of  the  sacred  writers  of 
the  New  Testament  expressed  themselves  in  Greek,  their 
ideas  were  Syriac ;  and  they  consequently  used  many  Syraic 
idioms,  and  a  few  Syriac  words.  The  chief  difference  between 
the  Syriac  and  Chaldee  consists  in  the  vowel-points  or  mode 
of  pronunciation  ;  and,  notwithstanding  the  forms  of  their 
respective  letters  are  very  dissimilar,  yet  the  correspondence 
between  the  two  dialects  is  so  close,  that  if  the  Chaldee  be 
written  in  Syriac  characters  without  points,  it  becomes  Syriac, 
with  the  exception  of  a  single  inflection  in  the  formation  of  the 
verbs.  The  earliest  document  still  extant  in  the  Syriac  dialect 
is  the  Peschito  or  old  Syriac  version  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testament. 

Though  more  remotely  allied  to  the  Hebrew  than  either 
of  the  preceding  dialects,  the  Arabic  language  possesses  suffi- 
cient analogy  to  explain  and  illustrate  the  former,  and  is  not, 
perhaps,  inferior  in  importance  to  the  Chaldee  or  the  Syriac ; 
particularly  as  it  is  a  living  language,  in  which  almost  every  sub- 
ject has  been  discussed,  and  which  has  received  the  minutest  in- 
vestigation  from   native    writers    and    lexicographers.      The 


392  THE   HEBREW   TEXT   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

Arabic  language  has  many  roots  in  common  with  the  Hebrew 
tongue  ;  and  this  again  contains  very  many  words  which  are  no 
longer  to  be  found  in  the  Hebrew  writings  that  are  extant,  but 
which  exist  in  the  Arabic  language.  The  learned  Jews,  who 
flourished  in  Spain  from  the  tenth  to  the  twelfth  century  under 
the  dominion  of  the  Moors,  were  the  iirst  who  applied  Arabic 
to  the  illustration  of  the  Hebrew  language  ;  and  subsequent 
Christian  writers,  as  Bochart,  the  elder  Schultens,  Olaus  Cel- 
sius, and  others,  have  diligently  and  successfully  applied  the 
Arabian  historians,  geographers,  and  authors  on  natural  his- 
tory, to  the  explanation  of  the  Bible. 

The  history  of  the  text  of  the  Old  Testament  may  be 
divided  into  four  epochs,  viz.  i. — From  the  writing  of  the 
Hebrew  book,  to  the  time  of  Christ ;  2. — From  the  time  of 
Christ  to  the  period  of  the  Masorites  ;  3. — From  the  time  of 
the  Masorites  to  the  invention  of  the  art  of  printing;  4. — From 
the  invention  of  printing  to  our  own  time. 

History  of  the  Hebrew  Text  from  the  Writing  of 

THE  Books  of  the  Old  Testament  until  the 

Time  of  Jesus  Christ. 

We  commence  with  the  Pentateuch,  concerning  the  earliest 
history  of  which  we  have  more  minute  information  than  we 
have  of  the  other  books  of  the  Old  Testament.  Previously  to 
the  building  of  Solomon's  Temple,  the  Pentateuch  was  de- 
posited by  the  side  of  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant  (Deut.  XXXI. 
24 — 26.),  to  be  consulted  by  the  Israelites  ;  and  after  the  erec- 
tion of  that  sacred  edifice,  it  was  deposited  in  the  treasury,  to- 
gether with  all  the  succeeding  productions  of  the  inspired 
writers.*  On  the  subsequent  destruction  of  the  temple  by 
Nebuchadnezzar,  the  autographs  of  the  sacred  books  are  sup- 
posed to  have  perished:  but  some  learned  men  have  con- 
jectured that  they  were  preserved,  because  it  does  not  appear 
that  Nebuchadnezzar  evinced  any  particular  enmity  against 
the  Jewish  religion ;  and  in  the  account  of  the  sacred  things 
carried  to  Babylon  (II.  Kings  XXV.  II.  Chron.  XXXVI.  Jer. 
LIL),  no  mention  is  made  of  the  sacred  books.  However  this 
may  be,  it  is  a  fact,  that  copies  of  these  autographs  were  car- 

*That  the  Law  was  placed  by  the  side  of  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant,  and  not 
in  it,  rests  on  clear  evidence.  The  Hebrew  expression  in  Deut.  XXXI.  26,  is : 
n1»T  n''"l3  im  n^P  ln^^  Qnp^  "YeshallplaceltCthe 
Law)  by  the  side  of  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant  of  the  Lord."  This  interpreta- 
tion is  supported  by  the  Greek  and  Samaritan  texts. 


THE   HEBREW   TEXT   OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT.  393 

ried  to  Babylon ;  for  we  find  the  prophet  Daniel  quoting  the 
Law,  (Dan.  IX.  ii.  13.)  and  also  expressly  mentioning  the 
prophecies  of  Jeremiah  (IX.  2.),  which  he  could  not  have  done, 
if  he  had  never  seen  them.  We  are  further  informed  that,  on 
the  finishing  of  the  temple  in  the  sixth  year  of  Darius,  the 
Jewish  worship  was  fully  re-established  according  as  it  is 
written  in  the  book  of  Moses  (Ezra  VI.  18.);  which  would  have 
been  impracticable,  if  the  Jews  had  not  had  copies  of  the  Law 
then  among  them.  But  what  still  more  clearly  proves  that 
they  must  have  had  transcripts  of  their  sacred  writings  during, 
as  well  as  subsequent  to,  the  Babylonian  captivity,  is  the  fact, 
that  when  the  people  requested  Ezra  to  produce  the  law  of  Moses 
(Nehem.  VIII.  i.),  they  did  not  entreat  him  to  get  it  dictated 
anew  to  them;  but  that  he  would  bring  forth  the  book  of  the  Law 
of  Moses,  which  the  Lord  had  commanded  to  Israel.  Further, 
long  before  the  time  of  Jesus  Christ,  another  edition  of  the 
Pentateuch  was  in  the  hands  of  the  Samaritans,  which  has  been 
preserved  to  our  time  ;  and  though  it  differs  in  some  instances 
from  the  text  of  the  Hebrew  Pentateuch,  yet  upon  the  whole 
it  accurately  agrees  with  the  Jewish  copies.  And  in  the  year 
286  or  285  before  the  Christian  Era,  the  Pentateuch  was  trans- 
lated into  the  Greek  language;  and  this  version,  whatever 
errors  may  now  be  detected  in  it,  was  so  executed  as  to  show 
that  the  text,  from  which  it  was  made,  agreed  with  the  text 
which  we  now  have. 

History  of  the  Hebrew  Text  from  the  Time  of  Jesus 
Christ  to  the  Age  of  the  Masorites. 

As  the  Jews  were  dispersed  through  various  countries,  to 
whose  inhabitants  Greek  was  vernacular,  they  gradually  ac- 
quired the  knowledge  of  this  language,  and  even  cultivated 
Greek  literature :  it  cannot  therefore  excite  surprise,  that  the 
Septuagint  version  should  be  so  generally  used,  as  to  cause  the 
Hebrew  original  to  be  almost  entirely  neglected.  Hence  the 
Septuagint  was  read  in  the  synagogues :  it  appears  to  have  been 
exclusively  followed  by  the  Alexandrian  Jew,  Philo,  and  it  was 
most  frequently,  though  not  solely,  consulted  by  Josephus, 
who  was  well  acquainted  with  Hebrew. 

In  the  second  century,  both  Jews  and  Christians  applied 
themselves  sedulously  to  the  study  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures. 
Besides  the  Peschito  or  Old  Syriac  version  (if  indeed  this  was 
not  executed  at  the  close  of  the  first  century),  which  was  made 
from  the  Hebrew  for  the  Syrian  Christians,  three  Greek  Ver- 
sions were  undertaken  and  completed ;  one  for  the  Jews  by 


394         THE  HEBREW  TEXT  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

Aquila,  an  apostate  from  Christianity  to  Judaism,  and  two 
by  Theodotion  and  Symmachus.  The  Hebrew  text, 
as  it  existed  in  the  East  from  the  year  200  to  the 
end  of  the  fifth  century,  is  presented  to  us  by  Origen 
in  his  Hexapla,  by  Jonathan  in  his  Targum  or  Para- 
phrase on  the  Prophets,  and  by  the  rabbins  in  the  Gemaras  or 
Commentaries  on  the  Mishna  or  Traditionary  Expositions  of  the 
Hebrew  Scriptures.  The  variants  are  scarcely  more  numerous 
or  more  important  than  in  the  versions  of  the  second  century. 
But  the  discrepancies,  which  were  observed  in  the  Hebrew 
manuscripts  in  the  second  or  at  least  in  the  third  century, 
excited  the  attention  of  the  Jews,  who  began  to  collate  copies, 
and  to  collect  various  readings ;  which,  being  distributed  into 
several  classes,  appear  in  the  Jerusalem  Talmud  about  the 
year  280. 

The  state  of  the  Hebrew  text,  in  the  west  of  Europe,  dur- 
ing the  fifth  century,  is  exhibited  to  us  in  the  Latin  version 
made  by  Jerome  from  the  original  Hebrew,  and  in  his  com- 
mentaries on  the  Scriptures.  From  a  careful  examination  of 
these  two  sources,  several  important  facts  have  been  collected, 
particularly  that 

(i.)  The  Old  Testament  contained  the  same  books  which 
are  at  present  found  in  our  copies. 

(2.)  The  form  of  the  Hebrew  letters  was  the  same  which  we 
now  have,  as  is  evident  from  Jerome's  frequently  taking 
notice  of  the  similar  letters,  beth  and  caph,  resh  and  daleth, 
mem  and  samech,  &c. 

(3.)  The  modern  vowel-points,  accents,  and  other  diacritic 
signs  were  utterly  unknown  to  Jerome.  Some  words  were  of 
doubtful  meaning  to  him,  because  they  were  destitute  of 
vowels. 

(4.)  The  divisions  of  chapters  and  verses  did  not  exist  in 
any  Hebrew  MSS.;  but  it  seems  that  both  the  Hebrew 
original  and  the  Septuagint  Greek  version  were  divided  into 
larger  sections,  which  differ  from  those  in  our  copies* 
because  Jerome,  in  his  commentary  on  Amos  VI.  9., 
says  that  what  is  the  beginning  of  another  chapter  in 
the  Hebrew,  is  in  the  Septuagint  the  end  of  the  pre- 
ceding. 

(5.)  The  Hebrew  MS.  used  by  Jerome  for  the  most  part 
agrees  with  the  Masoretic  text,  though  there  are  a  few  unim- 
porant  various  readings. 


the  hebrew  text  of  the  old  testament.       395 

History  of  the  Hebrew  Text  from  the  Age  of  the 

Masorites  to  the  Invention  of  the 

Art  of  Printing. 

I.  After  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  the  consequent 
dispersion  of  the  Jews  into  various  countries  of  the  Roman 
empire,  some  of  those  who  were  settled  in  the  East  applied 
themselves  to  the  cultivation  of  literature,  and  opened  various 
schools,  in  which  they  taught  the  Scriptures.  One  of  the 
most  distinguished  of  these  academies  was  that  established  at 
Tiberias,  in  Palestine,  which  Jerome  mentions  as  existing  in 
the  fifth  century.  The  doctors  of  this  school,  early  in  the 
sixth  century,  agreed  to  revise  the  sacred  text,  and  issue  an 
accurate  edition  of  it ;  for  which  purpose  they  collected  all  the 
scattered  critical  and  grammatical  observations  they  could 
obtain,  which  appeared  likely  to  contribute  towards  fixing 
both  the  reading  and  interpretation  of  Scripture,  into  one 
book,  which  they  called  HIIDD  {UaSORaU),  that  is  tradition^ 
because  it  consisted  of  remarks  which  they  had  received  from 
others.  Some  rabbinical  authors  pretend  that,  when  God  gave 
the  law  to  Moses  on  Mount  Sinai,  he  taught  him,  first,  its  true 
meaning,  and,  secondly,  its  true  interpretation ;  and  that  both 
these  were  handed  down  by  oral  tradition,  from  generation  to 
generation,  until  at  length  they  were  committed  to  writing. 
The  former  of  these,  viz.,  the  true  reading,  is  the  subject  of 
the  Masora;  the  latter  or  true  interpretation  is  that  of  the 
Mishna  and  Gemara,  of  which  an  account  is  given  in  a  subse- 
quent chapter  of  the  present  volume. 

The  Masoretic  notes  and  criticisms  relate  to  the  books, 
verses,  words,  letters,  vowel  points,  and  accents.  The  Masor- 
ites, or  Masorets,  as  the  inventors  of  this  system  were  called, 
were  the  first  who  distinguished  the  books  and  sections  of 
books  into  verses.  They  marked  the  number  of  all  the  verses 
of  each  book  and  section,  and  placed  the  amount  at  the  end 
of  each  in  numeral  letters,  or  in  some  symbolical  word  formed 
out  of  them  ;  and  they  also  marked  the  middle  verse  of  each 
book.  Further,  they  noted  the  verses  where  something  was 
supposed  to  be  forgotten  ;  the  words  which  they  believed  to 
be  changed ;  the  letters  which  they  deemed  to  be  superfluous ; 
the  repetitions  of  the  same  verses ;  the  different  reading  of  the 
words  which  are  redundant  or  defective  ;  the  number  of  times 
that  the  same  word  is  found  at  the  beginning,  middle,  or  end 
of  a  verse  ;  the  different  significations  of  the  same  word  ;  the 
agreement  or  conjunction  of  one  word  with  another ;   what 


396 


THE  HEBREW  TEXT  OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 


occurs  in  the 
Hebrew  Bible 


letters  are  pronounced,  and  what  are  inverted,  together  with 
such  as  hang  perpendicular,  and  they  took  the  number  of  each, 
for  the  Jews  cherish  the  sacred  books  with  such  reverence, 
that  they  make  a  scruple  of  changing  the  situation  of  a  letter 
which  is  evidently  misplaced ;  supposing  that  some  mystery 
has  occasioned  the  alteration.  They  have  likewise  reckoned 
which  is  the  middle  of  the  Pentateuch,  which  is  the  middle 
clause  of  each  book,  and  how  many  times  each  letter  of  the 
alphabet  occurs  in  all  the  Hebrew  Scriptures.  The  following 
table  from  Walton,  will  give  an  idea  of  their  laborious 
minuteness  in  these  researches : 

Times. 
41517 

41696 
13580 
20175 
22725 
21882 
22972 
22147 
32148 
59343 

Such  is  the  celebrated  Masorah  of  the  Jews.  At  first,  it 
did  not  accompany  the  text ;  afterwards  the  greatest  part  of 
it  was  written  in  the  margin.  In  order  to  bring  it  within  the 
margin,  it  became  necessary  to  abridge  the  work  itself.  This 
abridgement  was  called  the  little  Masora,  Masora  parva ;  but, 
being  found  too  short,  a  more  copious  abridgment  was  in- 
serted, which  was  distinguished  by  the  appellation  of  t\i&  great 
Masora,  Masora  magna.  The  omitted  parts  were  added  at 
the  end  of  the  text,  and  called  the  final  Masora,  Masora  finalis. 

The  age  when  the  Masorites  lived  has  been  much  con- 
troverted. Some  ascribe  the  Masoretic  notes  to  Moses  ;  others 
attribute  them  to  Ezra,  and  the  members  of  the  great  syna- 
gogue, and  their  successors  after  the  restoration  of  the 
temple  worship  on  the  death  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes. 
Usher  places  the  Masorites  before  the  time  of  Jerome  ;  Cappel, 
at  the  end  of  the  fifth  century ;  Marsh  is  of  opinion 
that  they  cannot  be  dated  higher  than  the  fourth  or  fifth  cen- 
tury ;  Walton,  Basnage,  Jahn,  and  others,  refer  them 
to  the  rabbins  of  Tiberias  in  the  sixth  century,  and  suppose 
that  they  commenced  the  Masora,  which  was  augmented  and 
continued  at  different  times,  by  various  authors ;  so  that  it  was 


Times. 

s 

^  Aleph 

occurs  in  the 
Hebrew  Bible 

42377 

7    Lamed 

^Beth 

38218 

"Q  Mem 

^  Gimel 

29537 

I    Nun 

n  Daleth 

32530 

0  Samech 

HHe 

47554 

y  Ain 

1   Vau 

76922 

D  Pe 

]   Zain 

22867 

^  Tsaddi 

n  Cheth 

23447 

p  Koph 

JOTeth 

1 1052 

-)  Resh 

1  Yod 

66420 

Si^Shin 

^  Caph 

48253 

riTau 

THE  HEBREW  TEXT  OF  THE  OLD   TESTAMENT.  397 

not  the  work  of  one  man,  or  of  one  age.  In  proof  of  this 
opinion,  which  we  think  the  most  probable,  we  may  remark 
that  the  notes  which  relate  to  the  variations  in  the  pointing  of 
particular  words,  must  have  been  made  after  the  introduction 
of  the  points,  and  consequently  after  the  Talmud  ;  other  notes 
must  have  been  made  before  the  Talmud  was  finished,  because 
it  is  from  these  notes  that  it  speaks  of  the  points  over  the 
letters,  and  of  the  variations  in  their  size  and  position.  Hence 
it  is  evident,  that  the  whole  was  not  the  work  of  the  Masorites 
of  Tiberias ;  further,  no  good  reason  can  be  assigned  to  prove 
the  Masora  the  work  of  Ezra,  or  his  contemporaries  ;  much 
appears  to  show  that  it  was  not ;  for,  in  the  first  place,  most 
of  the  notes  relate  to  the  vowel  points,  which,  we  have  seen, 
were  not  introduced  until  upwards  of  fifteen  hundred  years 
after  his  time,  and  the  remarks  made  about  the  shape  and 
position  of  the  letters  are  unworthy  of  an  inspired  writer,  being 
more  adapted  to  the  superstition  of  the  rabbins,  than  to  the 
gravity  of  a  divine  teacher.  Secondly^  No  one  can  suppose 
that  the  prophets  collected  various  readings  of  their  own 
prophecies,  though  we  find  this  has  been  done,  and  makes 
part  of  what  is  called  the  Masora.  Thirdly^  The  rabbins  have 
never  scrupled  to  abridge,  alter  or  reject  any  part  of  these 
notes,  and  to  intermix  their  own  observations,  or  those  of 
others,  which  is  a  proof  that  they  did  not  believe  them  to  be 
the  work  of  the  prophets ;  for  in  that  case  they  would  possess 
equal  authority  with  the  text,  and  should  be  treated  with  the 
same  regard.  Lastly^  Since  all  that  is  useful  in  the  Masora 
appears  to  have  been  written  since  Ezra's  time,  it  is  impossible 
to  ascribe  to  him  what  is  useless  and  trifling ;  and  from  these 
different  reasons  it  may  be  concluded  that  no  part  of  the 
Masora  was  written  by  Ezra.  And  even  though  we  were  to 
admit  that  he  began  it,  that  would  not  lead  us  to  receive  the 
present  system  in  the  manner  the  Jews  do,  because,  since  we 
cannot  now  distinguish  what  he  wrote,  and  since  we  find  many 
things  in  it  plainly  unworthy  of  an  inspired  writer,  we  may 
justly  refuse  it  the  credit  due  to  inspiration,  unless  his  part 
were  actually  separated  from  what  is  the  work  of  others.  On 
the  whole,  then,  it  appears  that  what  is  called  the  Masora  is 
entitled  to  no  greater  reverence  or  attention  than  may  be 
claimed  by  any  other  human  compilation. 

Concerning  the  value  of  the  Masoretic  system  of  notation, 
the  learned  are  greatly  divided  in  opinion.  Some  have  highly 
commended  the  undertaking,  and  have  considered  the  work  of 
the  Masorites  as  a  monument  of  stupendous  labor,  and   un- 


398    THE  HEBREW  TEXT  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

wearied  assiduity,  and  as  an  admirable  invention  for  delivering 
the  sacred  text  from  a  multitude  of  equivocations  and  per- 
plexities to  which  it  was  liable,  and  for  putting  a  stop  to  the 
unbounded  licentiousness  and  rashness  of  transcribers  and 
critics,  who  often  made  alterations  in  the  text  on  their  own 
private  authority.  Others,  however,  have  altogether  censured 
the  design,  suspecting  that  the  Masorites  corrupted  the  purity 
of  the  text  by  substituting,  for  the  ancient  and  true  reading 
of  their  forefathers,  another  reading,  more  favorable  to  their 
prejudices,  and  more  opposite  to  Christianity,  whose  testi- 
monies and  proofs  they  were  desirous  of  weakening  as  much  as 
possible. 

Without  adopting  either  of  these  extremes.  Marsh 
observes,  that  "  the  text  itself,  as  regulated  by  the  learned 
Jews  of  Tiberias,  was  probably  the  result  of  a  collation  of 
manuscripts.  But  as  those  Hebrew  critics  were  cautious  of 
too  many  corrections  into  the  text,  they  noted  in  the  margins 
of  their  manuscripts,  or  in  their  critical  collections,  such  various 
readings,  derived  from  other  manuscripts,  either  by  themselves 
or  by  their  predecessors,  as  appeared  to  be  worthy  of  atten- 
tion. This  is  the  real  origin  of  those  marginal  or  Masoretic 
readings  which  we  find  in  many  editions  of  the  Hebrew  Bible 
But  the  propensity  of  the  later  Jews  to  seek  mystical  meanings 
in  the  plainest  facts,  gradually  induced  the  belief  that  both 
textual  and  marginal  readings  proceeded  from  the  sacred  writers 
themselves ;  and  that  the  latter  were  transmitted  to  posterity 
by  oral  tradition,  as  conveying  some  mysterious  application  of 
the  written  words.  They  were  regarded  therefore  as  mate- 
rials, not  of  criticism,  but  of  interpretation^  The  same 
critic  elsewhere  remarks,  that  notwithstanding  all  the  care 
of  the  Masorites  to  preserve  the  sacred  text  without  variations, 
"  if  their  success  has  not  been  complete,  either  in  establishing 
or  preserving  the  Hebrew  text,  they  have  been  guilty  only 
of  the  fault  which  is  common  to  every  human  effort." 

In  the  period  between  the  sixth  and  the  tenth  centuries, 
the  Jews  had  two  celebrated  academies,  one  at  Babylon  in  the 
East,  and  another  at  Tiberias  in  the  West;  where  their  litera- 
ture was  cultivated,  and  the  Scriptures  were  very  frequently 
transcribed.  Hence  arose  two  recensions  or  editions  of  the 
Hebrew  Scriptures,  which  were  collated  in  the  eighth  or  ninth 
century.  The  differences  or  various  readings  observed  in  them 
were  noted,  and  have  been  transmitted  to  our  time  under  the 
appellation  of  the  Oriental  and  Occidental,  or  Eastern  and 
Western    Readings.     They   are   variously   computed   at   210, 


THE  HEBREW  TEXT  OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT.  399 

2i6,  and  220,  and  are  printed  by  Walton  in  the  Appen- 
dix to  his  splendid  edition  of  the  Polyglott  Bible.  It 
is  worthy  of  remark,  that  not  one  of  these  various  readings  is 
found  in  the  Septuagint :  they  do  not  relate  to  vowel  points 
or  accents,  nor  do  any  of  them  affect  the  sense.  Our  printed 
editions  vary  from  the  Eastern  readings  in  fifty-five  places. 

History  of  the  Hebrew  Text  from  the  Invention  of 
THE  Art  of  Printing  to  Our  Own  Times. 

Shortly  after  the  invention  of  the  art  of  printing,  the 
Hebrew  Scriptures  were  committed  to  the  press ;  at  first  in  de- 
tached portions,  and  afterwards  the  entire  Bible. 

We  excerpt  here  from  Home  (1.  c.)  the  principal  editions 
of  Hebrew  Scriptures. 

Editiones  Principes. 

Psalterium  Hebraicum,  cum  commentario  KiMCHll.    Anno 

237  (1477)-     4to. 

The  first  printed  Hebrew  book.  It  is  of  extreme  rarity, 
and  is  printed  (probably  at  Bologna)  with  a  square  Hebrew 
type,  approaching  that  of  the  German  Jews.  The  text  is 
without  points,  except  in  the  four  first  psalms,  which  are 
clumsily  pointed.  The  commentary  of  Rabbi  Kimchi  is  sub- 
joined to  each  verse  of  the  text  in  the  rabbinical  character, 
and  is  much  more  complete  than  in  the  subsequent  editions, 
as  it  contains  all  those  passages  which  were  afterwards  omitted, 
as  being  hostile  to  Christianity.  Prof.  Jahn  states  that  it  is 
incorrectly  printed,  and  that  the  matres  lectionis  are  introduced 
or  omitted  at  the  pleasure  of  the  editors, 

Biblia  Hebraica,  cum  punctis.     Soncino,  1488,  folio. 

The  first  edition  of  the  entire  Hebrew  Bible  ever  printed. 
It  is  at  present  of  such  extreme  rarity,  that  only  nine  or  ten 
copies  of  it  are  known  to  be  in  existence.  One  of  these  is  in 
the  library  of  Exeter  College,  Oxford. 

Editiones    Primari^,    or   Those   Which    Have    Been 
Adopted  as  the  Bases  of  Subsequent  Impressions. 

Biblia  Hebraica,  Svo.  Brixiae,  1494. 

This  edition  was  conducted  by  Gerson,  the  son  of  Rabbi 
Moses.  It  is  also  of  extreme  rarity,  and  is  printed  in  long 
lines,  except  part  of  the  Psalms,  which  is  in  two  columns.  The 
identical  copy  of  this  edition,  from  which  Luther  made  his 
German  translation,  is  said  to  be  preserved  in  the  Royal 
Library  at  Berlin.     This  edition  was  the  basis  of:    i. — The 


400         THE  HEBREW  TEXT  OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

Hebrew  Text  of  the  Complutensian  Polyglott ;  2. — Bomberg's 
first  Rabbinical  Bible,  Venice,  15 18,  in  4  vols,  folio  ;  3. — Daniel, 
Bomberg's  4to.  Hebrew  Bible,  Venice,  1518;  4. — His  second 
Hebrew  Bible,  4to.  Venice,  1521  ;  and,  5. — Sebastian  Munster's 
Hebrew  Bible,  Basil,  1536,  in  2  vols.  4to. 

Another  primary  edition  is  the  Biblia  Hebraica  Bomberg- 
iana  II.  folio,  Venice,  1525,  1526,  folio. 

This  was  edited  by  Rabbi  Jacob  Ben  Chajim,  who  had  the 
reputation  of  being  profoundly  learned  in  the  Masora,  and 
other  branches  of  Jewish  erudition.  He  pointed  the  text 
according  to  the  Masoretic  system.  This  edition  is  the  basis 
of  all  the  modern  pointed  copies. 

Editions  of  the  Hebrew  Bible,  with  Rabbinical  Com- 
mentaries. 

Besides  the  Biblia  Rabbinica  I.  et  II.  just  mentioned,  we 
may  notice  in  this  class  the  three  following  editions,  viz : 

Biblia  Hebraica  cum  utraque  Masora,  Targum,  necnon 
commentariis  Rabbinorum,  studio  et  cum  prsefatione  R.  Jacob 
F.  Chajim,  Venetiis,  1 547-1 549,  4  tomis  in  2  vols,  folio. 

This  is  the  second  of  Rabbi  Jacob  Ben  Chajim's  editions ; 
and,  according  to  M.  Brunet,  is  preferable  to  the  preceding,  as 
well  as  to  another  edition  executed  in  1568,  also  from  the  press 
of  Daniel  Bomberg. 

Biblia  Hebraea,  cum  utraque  Masora  et  Targum,  item  cum 
commentariis  Rabbinorum,  studio  Johannis  Buxtorfii,  patris ; 
adjecta  est  ejusdem  Tiberias,  sive  commentarius  Masoreticus. 
Basileae,  1618,  1619,  1620,  4  tomis  in  2  vols,  folio. 

This  great  work  was  executed  at  the  expense  of  Louis 
Kcenig,  an  opulent  bookseller  at  Basle.  On  account  of  the 
additional  matter  which  it  contains,  it  is  held  in  great  esteem 
by  Hebrew  scholars,  many  of  whom  prefer  it  to  the  Hebrew 
Bibles  printed  by  Bomberg.  Buxtorf's  Biblia  Rabbinica  con- 
tains the  commentaries  of  the  celebrated  Jewish  Rabbins, 
Jarchi,  Aben  Ezra,  Kimchi,  Levi  Ben  Gerson,  and  Saadias 
Haggaon.  An  appendix  is  subjoined,  containing,  besides  the 
Jerusalem  Targum,  the  great  Masora,  corrected  and  amended 
by  Buxtorf  and  the  various  lections  of  the  Rabbis  Ben  Ascher 
and  Ben  Naphtali.  Buxtorf  also  annexed  the  points  to  the 
Chaldee  paraphrase.  The  Tiberias,  published  by  Buxtorf  in 
1620,  was  intended  to  illustrate  the  Masora  and  other  additions 
to  his  great  Bible. 

Biblia  Hebraica  Magna  Rabbinica.  Amstelodami  1724-27, 
4  vols,  folio. 


THE   HEBREW   TEXT   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT.  401 

"  This  is  unquestionably  the  most  copious  and  most  valu- 
able of  all  the  Rabbinical  Bibles,  and  was  edited  by  Moses 
Ben  Simeon,  of  Frankfort.  It  is  founded  upon  the  Bomberg 
editions,  and  contains  not  only  their  contents,  but  also  those 
of  Buxtorf,  with  additional  remarks  by  the  editor." 

Principal  Editions  of  the  Hebrew  Bible,  including 
THOSE  with  Critical  Notes  and  Apparatus. 

The  first  edition  of  the  Hebrew  Bible,  printed  by  Bomberg, 
and  edited  by  Felix  Pratensis  (Venice,  15 18),  contains  the 
various  lections  of  the  Eastern  and  Western  recensions,  which 
are  also  to  be  found  in  Buxtorf's  Biblia  Rabbinica. 

Biblia  Hebraica,  cum  Latina  Versione  Sebastiani  MUNSTERI. 
Basileae,  1534,  1535,  2  vols,  folio. 

The  Hebrew  type  of  this  edition  resembles  the  characters 
of  the  German  Jews.  The  Latin  version  of  Munster  is  placed 
by  the  side  of  the  Hebrew  text.  Though  the  editor  has  not 
indicated  what  manuscripts  he  used,  he  is  supposed  to  have 
formed  his  text  upon  the  edition  printed  at  Brescia  in  1494, 
or  the  still  more  early  one  of  1488.  His  prolegomena  contain 
much  useful  critical  matter,  and  his  notes  are  subjoined  to  each 
chapter.  This  is  the  first  edition  of  the  Hebrew  Bible  printed 
in  Germany. 

Hebraicorum  Bibliorum  Veteris  Testament!  Latina  Inter- 
pretatio,  opera  olim  Xantis  Pagnini,  Lucensis :  nunc  verd 
Benedicti  Ariae  Montani,  Hispalensis,  Francisci  Raphelengii, 
Alnetani,  Guidonis  et  Nicolai  Fabriciorum  Boderianorum  fca- 
trum  coUato  studio,  ad  Hebraicam  dictionem  diligentissime 
expensa.    Christ.  Plantinus  Antwerpiae  excudebat,  1571.    Folio. 

This  is  the  first  edition  executed  by  Plantin,  and  is  re- 
puted to  be  the  most  correct.  The  Hebrew  text  is  the  same 
as  that  printed  in  the  Antwerp,  or  Spanish  Polyglott ;  and  the 
interlineary  Latin  version  is  that  of  Pagninus,  corrected  by  B. 
Arias  Montanus.  The  Latin  words  correspond  with  the 
Hebrew  above  them ;  and  the  Hebrew  roots  are  placed  in  the 
margin  to  assist  the  reader.  The  order  of  the  books  of  the 
Old  Testament  agrees  with  that  of  the  Latin  Bibles,  and  not 
with  that  of  the  Jews.  The  New  Testament  in  Greek,  also 
with  an  interlineary  Latin  version,  printed  in  1572,  is  added  to 
this  edition. 

Biblia  Hebraica:  eorundem  Latina  Interpretatio  Xantis 
Pagnini,  Lucensis,  recenter  Benedicti  Ariae  Montani,  Hispa- 
lensis et  quorundam  aliorum  coUato  studio,  ad  Hebraicam 
dictionem  diligentissime  expensa.   Accesserunt  et  huic  edition! 

z 


402  THE   HEBREW   TEXT   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

Libri  Graec^  scripti,  qui  vocantur  Apocryphi,  cum  interlineari 
interpretatione  Latina  ex  Bibliis  Complutensibus  petita.  Ant- 
werpiae,  ex  officina  Christophori  Plantini.     1584.     Folio. 

This  is  the  second  edition  printed  by  Plantin ;  and  it  has 
the  New  Testament  in  Greek,  also  with  an  interlineary  version 
and  a  separate  title. 

Biblia  Sacra  Hebraea  correcta,  et  collata  cum  antiquissimis 
exemplaribus  manuscriptis  et  hactenus  impressis.  Amstelo- 
dami.     Typis  et  sumtibus  Josephi  Athiae.     1661,  1667,  8vo. 

An  extremely  rare  edition  of  a  most  beautifully  executed 
Hebrew  Bible.  The  impression  of  1667  is  said  to  be  the  most 
correct. 

Biblia  Hebraica,  cum  notis  Hebraicis  et  Lemmatibus  Latinis, 
ex  recensione  Dan.  Ern.  JABLONSKI,  cum  ejus  Praefatione 
Latina.     Berolini,  1699,  large  8vo. 

De  Rossi  considers  this  to  be  one  of  the  most  correct  and 
important  editions  of  the  Hebrew  Bible  ever  printed.  It  is 
extremely  scarce.  Jablonski  published  another  edition  of  the 
Hebrew  Bible  in  1712,  at  Berlin,  without  points,  in  large 
i2mo.,  and  subjoined  to  it  Leusden's  Catalogue  of  2294  select 
verses,  containing  all  the  words  occurring  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. There  is  also  a  Berlin  edition  of  the  Hebrew  Bible 
without  points,  in  171 1,  24mo.,  from  the  press  of  Jablonski, 
who  has  prefixed  a  short  preface.  It  was  begun  under  the 
editorial  care  of  S.  G.  Starcke,  and  finished,  on  his  death,  by 
Jablonski. 

Biblia  Hebraica,  edente  Everardo  Van  der  Hooght. 
Amstelodami  et  Ultrajecti,  8vo.  2  vols.  1705. 

A  work  of  singular  beauty  and  rarity.  The  Hebrew  text  is 
printed  after  Athias'  second  edition,  with  marginal  notes 
pointing  out  the  contents  of  each  section.  The  characters, 
especially  the  vowel  points,  are  uncommonly  clear  and  dis- 
tinct. At  the  end.  Van  der  Hooght  has  given  the  various 
lections  occuring  in  the  editions  of  Bomberg,  Plantin,  Athias, 
and  others. 

Biblia  Hebraica  cum  notis  criticis,  et  Versione  Latina  ad 
notas  criticas  facta.  Accedunt  Libri  Graeci,  qui  Deutero- 
canonici  vocantur,  in  tres  Classes  distribute  Autore  Carolo  Fran- 
cisco Houbigant.     Lutetiae  Parisiorum,  1753,  4  vols,  folio. 

The  text  of  this  edition  is  that  of  Van  der  Hooght,  without 
points ;  and  in  the  margin  of  the  Pentateuch,  Houbigant  has 
added  various  lections  from  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch.  He 
collated  twelve  manuscripts,  of  which,  however,  he  is  said  not 
to  have  made  all  the  use  he  might  have  done.    Houbigant  has 


THE   HEBREW   TEXT   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT.  403 

also  printed  a  new  Latin  version  of  his  own,  expressive  of  such 
a  text  as  his  critical  emendations  appeared  to  justify  and 
recommend.     The  book  is  most  beautifully  printed. 

Vetus  Testamentum  Hebraicum,  cum  variis  Lectionibus. 
Edidit  Benjaminus  Kennicott,  S.  T.  P.  Oxonii,  1776,  1780, 
2  vols,  folio. 

This  splendid  work  was  preceded  by  two  dissertations  on 
the  state  of  the  Hebrew  text,  published  in  1753  and  1759,  the 
object  of  which  was  to  show  the  necessity  of  the  same  exten- 
sive collation  of  Hebrew  manuscripts  of  the  Old  Testament  as 
had  already  been  undertaken  for  the  Greek  manuscripts  of  the 
New  Testament.  The  utility  of  the  proposed  collation  being 
generally  admitted,  a  very  liberal  subscription  was  made  to 
defray  the  expense  of  the  collation,  amounting  on  the  whole 
to  nearly  ten  thousand  pounds,  and  the  name  of  his  Majesty 
King  George  HI.  headed  the  list  of  subscribers.  Various 
persons  were  employed  both  at  home  and  abroad  ;  but  of  the 
foreign  literati,  the  principal  was  Professor  Bruns,  of  the 
University  of  Helmstadt,  who  not  only  collated  Hebrew  manu- 
scripts in  Germany,  but  went  for  that  purpose  into  Italy  and 
Switzerland.  The  business  of  collation  continued  from  1760 
to  1769,  inclusive,  during  which  period  Kennicott  pub- 
lished annually  an  account  of  the  progress  which  was  made. 
More  than  six  hundred  Hebrew  manuscripts,  and  sixteen 
manuscripts  of  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch,  were  discovered  in 
different  libraries  in  England  and  on  the  Continent,  many  of 
which  were  wholly  collated,  and  others  consulted  in  important 
passages.  Several  years  necessarily  elapsed,  after  the  collations 
were  finished,  before  the  materials  could  be  arranged  and 
digested  for  publication.  The  variations,  contained  in  nearly 
seven  hundred  bundles  of  papers,  being  at  length  digested 
(including  the  collations  made  by  Professor  Bruns),  and  the 
whole,  when  put  together,  being  corrected  by  the  original 
collations,  and  then  fairly  tr,anscribed  into  thirty  folio  volumes, 
the  work  was  put  to  press  in  1773.  In  1776  the  first  volume 
of  Kennicott's  Hebrew  Bible  was  delivered  to  the  public, 
and  in  1780  the  second  volume.  It  was  printed  at  the  Claren- 
don Press ;  and  the  University  of  Oxford  has  the  honor  of 
having  produced  the  first  critical  edition  upon  a  large  scale, 
both  of  the  Greek  Testament  and  of  the  Hebrew  Bible. 

"  The  text  of  Kennicott's  edition  was  printed  from  that  of 
Van  der  Hooght,  with  which  the  Hebrew  manuscripts,  by 
Kennicott's  direction,  were  all  collated.  But,  as  variations  in 
the  points  were  disregarded  in  the  collation,  the  points  were 


404  THE    SAMARITAN   CODEX. 

not  added  in  the  text.  The  various  readings,  as  in  the  critical 
editions  of  the  Greek  Testament,  were  printed  at  the  bottom 
of  the  page,  with  references  to  the  correspondent  readings  of 
the  text.  In  the  Pentateuch,  the  deviations  of  the  Samaritan 
text  were  printed  in  a  column  parallel  to  the  Hebrew ;  and  the 
variations  observable  in  the  Samaritan  manuscripts,  which 
differ  from  each  other  as  well  as  the  Hebrew,  are  likewise 
noted,  with  references  to  the  Samaritan  printed  text.  To  this 
collation  of  manuscripts  was  added  a  collation  of  the  most 
distinguished  editions  of  the  Hebrew  Bible,  in  the  same  manner 
as  Wetstein  has  noted  the  variations  observable  in  the  prin- 
cipal editions  of  the  Greek  Testament.  Nor  did  Kennicott 
confine  his  collation  to  manuscripts  and  editions.  He  further 
considered,  that  as  the  quotations  from  the  Greek  Testament 
in  the  works  of  ecclesiastical  writers  afford  another  source  of 
various  readings,  so  the  quotations  from  the  Hebrew  Bible  in 
the  works  of  Jewish  writers  are  likewise  subjects  of  critical 
inquiry.  For  this  purpose  he  had  recourse  to  the  most  distin- 
guished among  the  rabbinical  writings,  but  particularly  to  the 
Talmud,  the  text  of  which  is  as  ancient  as  the  third  century. 
In  the  quotation  of  his  authorities  he  designates  them  by 
numbers,  from  i  to  692,  including  manuscripts,  editions,  and 
rabbinical  writings,  which  numbers  are  explained  in  the  Dis- 
sertatio  Generalis,  annexed  to  the  second  volume." 

To  Kennicott's  Hebrew  Bible,  M.  de  Rossi  published  an 
important  supplement  at  Parma  (i 784-1 787),  in  four  volumes 
4to.  of  Varies  Lectiones  Veteris  Testamenti.  This  work  and 
Kennicott's  edition  form  one  complete  set  of  collations. 
Of  the  immense  mass  of  various  readings  which  the  collations 
of  Kennicott  and  M.  de  Rossi  exhibit,  multitudes  are  in- 
significant, consisting  frequently  of  the  omission  or  addition  of 
a  single  letter  in  a  word,  as  a  vau,  &c. 

Closely  allied  in  history  with  the  Hebrew  text  is  the 
Samaritan  Codex. 

When  the  ten  tribes  seceded  from  the  central  government 
under  Roboam,  and  set  up  an  independent  government  under 
Jeroboam  at  Samaria,  they  were  always  regarded  by  those  who 
had  remained  faithful  to  Solomon's  issue  in  the  kingdom  of 
Juda,  as  prevaricators.  Many  fierce  and  bloody  wars  were 
waged  between  the  two  kingdoms,  till  the  Assyrians  overthrew 
the  kingdom  of  Israel,  and  took  her  sons  captive  (721  B.  C). 
To  inhabit  the  land  of  Israel  thus  made  desolate,  the  Assyrian 
monarchs  sent  thither  colonists  from  the  provinces  of  Babylon, 
from  Cutha,  Ava,  Chamath,  Sepharvaim.     The  remnants  of 


THE   SAMARITAN   CODEX.  406 

Jews  that  had  been  left  in  the  land  blended  with  these  foreign 
colonists,  and  thus  a  mongrel  race  was  formed  that  was  termed 
Samaritans,  from  the  name  of  the  chief  city  of  their  land. 
Samaria,  Heb.  Shomeron,  was  thus  called  because  it  was  built 
on  a  hill  purchased  from  one  Shomer.  At  first  they  brought 
with  them  their  heterodox  idolatry,  which  ignored  Jahve.  It 
would  be  dangerous  to  allow  such  a  people  to  entrench  them- 
selves so  close  to  Juda,  and  carry  on  the  false  worship  of  the 
Assyrian  gods,  so  Jahve  sent  upon  them  lions  to  ravage  their 
land,  to  show  that  they  must  recognize  him.  Moved  by  this 
scourge,  Assarhaddon,  [Assur-ah-iddin]  the  Assyrian  monarch, 
sent  to  them  one  of  Israel's  priests,  that  had  been  taken  captive, 
to  teach  them  the  religion  of  Jahve.  The  polytheism  of  the  Assy- 
rians admitted  of  any  number  of  gods,  and  it  was  thought  by  them 
that  the  punishment  had  come  upon  the  colonists  simply  be- 
cause they  ignored  the  god  of  the  land.  That  is,  they  believed 
that  the  land  had  a  particular  deity,  who  was  to  be  united  in 
worship  to  the  other  particular  deities  which  they  worshipped. 
The  knowledge  that  the  captive  priest  gave  them  of  Jahve  did 
not,  in  effect,  exclude  the  worship  of  their  own  deities.  They 
recognized  Jahve  only  as  a  particular  god  of  the  land,  and 
though  they  built  temples  to  him,  his  worship  was  held  in  an 
inferior  rank,  for  they  chose  as  Jahve's  priests  the  lowest  of 
the  people.  They  neglected  the  supreme  and  exclusive  charac- 
ter of  Jahve's  worship,  and  must  have  considered  such  de- 
mands by  Jahve  as  a  jealous  exclusiveness,  which  they  could 
not  sanction.  So  that,  at  the  same  time  that  they  maintained 
a  sort  of  worship  of  Jahve,  every  nation  worshipped  its  own 
particular  deity.  For  the  men  of  Babylon  made  Soccoth 
Benoth,  and  the  Cuthites  made  Nerghal,  and  the  men  of 
Chamath  made  Asima,  and  the  men  of  Ava  made  Nibhaz 
and  Thartack,  and  they  that  were  of  Sepharvaim  burnt  their 
children  in  fire  to  Adramelech  and  Anamelech,  the  gods  of 
Sepharvaim  (IV.  Kings  XVII.  30,  31).  Such  was  the  origin 
and  religion  of  the  Samaritans.  They  have  a  copy  of  the 
Pentateuch,  in  which  the  Hebrew  words  are  inscribed  in 
Samaritan  characters.  The  date  of  this  is  uncertain,  but  it 
certainly  must  go  back  to  the  time  of  the  captive  priest,  sent 
thither  to  instruct  them.  He  could  not  well  do  this  without  a 
copy  of  the  Law.  It  is  not  improbable  that  its  date  would  go 
back  even  further,  to  the  founding  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel 
under  Jeroboam. 

Although  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch   was  known  to   and 
cited  by  Eusebius,  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  Procopius  of  Gaza, 


406  THE  SAMARITAN  CODEX. 

Diodorus  of  Tarsus,  Jerome,  Syncellus,  and  other  ancient 
Fathers,  yet  it  afterwards  fell  into  oblivion  for  upwards  of  a 
thousand  years,  so  that  its  very  existence  began  to  be  ques- 
tioned. Joseph  Scaliger  was  the  first  who  excited  the  atten- 
tion of  learned  men  to  this  valuable  relic  of  antiquity ;  and  M. 
Peiresc  procured  a  copy  from  Egypt,  which,  together  with  the 
ship  that  brought  it,  was  unfortunately  captured  by  pirates. 
More  successful  was  Usher,  who  procured  six  copies 
from  the  East ;  and  from  another  copy,  purchased  by 
Pietro  della  Valle  for  M.  de  Sancy  (then  ambassador  from 
France  to  Constantinople,  and  afterwards  Archbishop  of  St. 
Maloes),  Father  Morinus  printed  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch, 
for  the  first  time,  in  the  Paris  Polyglott.  This  was  afterwards 
reprinted  in  the  London  Polyglott  by  Walton,  who  corrected 
it  from  three  manuscripts  which  had  formerly  belonged  to 
Usher. 

Variations  of  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  from  the 
Hebrew. 

The  celebrated  critic,  Le  Clerc,  has  instituted  a  minute 
comparison  of  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  with  the  Hebrew  text ; 
and  has,  with  much  accuracy  and  labor,  collected  those  pas- 
sages in  which  he  is  of  opinion  that  the  former  is  more  or  less 
correct  than  the  latter.     For  instance  : 

I. — The  Samaritan  text  appears  to  be  more  correct  than  the 
Hebrew,  in  Gen.  H.  4,  VH.  2,  XIX.  19,  XX.  2,  XXHI.  16, 
XXIV.  14,  XLIX.  10,  II,  L.  26;  Exod.  I.  2,  IV.  2. 

2. — It  is  expressed  more  conformably  to  analogy,  in  Gen. 
XXXI.  39,  XXXV.  26,  XXXVII.  17,  XLI.  34,  43,  XLVII.  3 ; 
Deut.  XXXII.  5. 

3. — //  has  glosses  and  additions  in  Gen.  XXIX.  15,  XXX.  36, 
XLI.  16;  Exod.  VII.  18,  VIII.  23,  IX.  5,  XXL  20,  XXII.  5, 
XXIIL  10,  XXXII.  9;  Lev.  L  10,  XVII.  4;  Deut.  V.  21. 

4. — It  appears  to  have  been  altered  by  a  critical  hand,  in  Gen. 

11.  2,  IV.  10,  IX.  5,  X.  19,  XI.  21,  XVIII.  3,  XIX.  12,  XX.  16, 
XXIV.  38,  55,  XXXV.  7,  XXXVI.  6,  XLI.  50;  Exod.  I.  5, 
XIII.  6,  XV.  5  ;  Numb.  XXII.  32. 

5. — It  is  more  full  than  the  Hebrew  text,  in  Gen.  V.  8,  XI. 
31,  XIX.  9,  XXVII.  34.  XXXIX.  4,  XLIII.  25  ;  Exod.  XII. 
40,  XL.  17 ;  Numb.  IV.  14 ;  Deut.  XX.  16. 

6. — //  is  defective  in  Gen.  XX.  16,  and  XXV.  14. 

It  agrees  with  the  Septuagint  version  in  Gen.  IV.  8,  XIX. 

12,  XX.  16,  XXIII.  2,  XXIV.  55,  62,  XXVI.  18,  XXIX.  27, 
XXXV.  29,  XXXIX.  8,  XLI.  16,  43.  XLIII.  26,  XLIX.  26; 
Exod.  VIII.  3,  and  in  various  other  passages. 


THE   SAMARITAN   CODEX.  407 

7. — //  sometint'^s  varies  from  the  Septuagint,  as  in  Gen.  I.  7, 
V.  29,  VIII.  3,  7,  XLIX.  22  ;  Num.  XXII.  4. 

The  differences  between  the  Samaritan  and  Hebrew  Penta- 
teuchs  may  be  accounted  for  by  the  usual  sources  of  various 
readings,  viz.,  the  negligence  of  copyists,  introduction  of 
glosses  from  the  margin  into  the  text,  the  confounding  of 
similar  letters,  the  transposition  of  letters,  the  addition  of  ex- 
planatory words,  &c.  The  Samaritan  Pentateuch,  however,  is 
of  great  use  and  authority  in  establishing  correct  readings  ;  in 
many  instances  it  agrees  remarkably  with  the  Greek  Septua- 
gint,  and  it  contains  numerous  and  excellent  various  lections, 
which  are  in  every  respect  preferable  to  the  received  Masoretic 
readings,  and  are  further  confirmed  by  the  agreement  of  other 
ancient  versions. 

The  most  material  variations  between  the  Samaritan  Pen- 
tateuch and  the  Hebrew,  which  affect  the  authority  of  the 
former,  occur,  first,  in  the  prolongation  of  the  patriarchal 
generations ;  and,  secondly,  in  the  alteration  of  Ebal  into 
Garizim  (Deut.  XXVII.),  in  order  to  support  their  separation 
from  the  Jews. 

With  regard  to  the  charge  of  altering  the  Pentateuch,  it 
has  been  shown  by  Kennicott,  from  a  consideration  of  the 
character  of  the  Samaritans,  their  known  reverence  for  the 
Law,  our  Lord's  silence  on  the  subject  in  his  memorable  con- 
versation with  the  woman  of  Samaria,  and  from  various  other 
topics ;  that  what  almost  all  biblical  critics  have  hitherto  con- 
sidered as  a  wilful  corruption  by  the  Samaritans,  is  in  all 
probability  the  true  reading,  and  that  the  corruption  is  to  be 
charged  on  the  Jews  themselves.  In  judging,  therefore,  of 
the  genuineness  of  a  reading,  we  are  not  to  declare  absolutely 
for  one  of  these  Pentateuchs  against  the  other,  but  to  prefer 
the  true  readings  in  both.  "  One  ancient  copy,"  Kennicott 
remarks,  with  equal  truth  and  justice,  "  has  been  received  from 
the  Jews,  and  we  are  truly  thankful  for  it ;  another  ancient 
copy  is  offered  by  the  Samaritans  ;  let  us  thankfully  accept 
that  likewise.  Both  have  been  often  transcribed  ;  both,  there- 
fore, may  contain  errors.  They  differ  in  many  instances, 
therefore  the  errors  must  be  many.  Let  the  two  parties  be 
heard  without  prejudice  ;  let  their  evidences  be  weighed  with 
impartiality  ;  and  let  the  genuine  words  of  Moses  be  ascertained 
by  their  joint  assistance.  Let  the  variations  of  all  the  manu- 
scripts on  each  side  be  carefully  collected,  and  then  critically 
examined  by  the  context  and  the  ancient  versions.  If  the 
Samaritan  copy  should  be  found  in  some  places  to  correct  the 


408  VERSIONS   OF   THE   SAMARITAN   PENTATEUCH. 

Hebrew,  yet  will  the  Hebrew  copy  in  other  places  correct  the 
Samaritan.  Each  copy,  therefore,  is  invaluable;  each  copy, 
therefore,  demands  our  pious  veneration,  and  attentive  study. 
The  Pentateuch  will  never  be  understood  perfectly,  till  we 
admit  the  authority  of  both."* 

Versions  of  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch. 

Of  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  two  versions  are  extant ;  one 
in  the  proper  Samaritan  dialect,  which  is  usually  termed  the 
Samaritan  Version,  and  another  in  Arabic. 

We  here  reproduce  on  the  opposite  page  a  specimen  of 
the  Samaritan  Codex,  and  its  Samaritan  translation  from 
Walton's  Polyglott.     The  passage  is  from  Genesis,  I.  1-14. 

The  Samaritan  Version  was  made  in  Samaritan  characters, 
from  the  Hebraeo-Samaritan  text  into  the  Samaritan  dialect, 
which  is  intermediate  between  the  Hebrew  and  the  Aramaean 
languages.  This  version  is  of  great  antiquity,  having  been 
made  at  least  before  the  time  of  Origen,  that  is,  early  in  the 
second  century.  The  author  of  the  Samaritan  version  is  un- 
known, but  he  has  in  general  adhered  very  closely  and  faith- 
fully to  the  original  text  ;  so  that  this  version  is  almost  ex- 
actly the  counterpart  of  the  original  Hebrew-Samaritan  Codex 
with  all  its  various  readings.  This  shows,  in  a  degree  really 
surprising,  how  very  carefully  and  accurately  the  Hebrew 
Pentateuch  has  been  copied  and  preserved  by  the  Samaritans, 
from  the  ancient  times  in  which  their  version  was  made. 

After  the  rise  of  protestantism,  the  adherents  of  the  new 
sect  made  a  fierce  attack  on  the  Latin  Vulgate.  They,  at  the 
same  time,  greatly  extolled  the  original  languages  of  Holy 
Scripture,  and  strove  to  maintain  that  the  Hebrew  text  had 
persevered  unchanged  from  the  beginning.  To  counteract 
this  movement,  some  Catholics  depreciated  the  Hebrew  text 
far  below  its  merits.  It  is  undoubtedly  true  that  both  opin- 
ions are  extreme.  The  Hebrew  text,  like  all  other  old  docu- 
ments, has  suffered  much  from  various  causes,  and  in  the  text 
are  many  uncertain  readings.  In  fact,  as  it  is  older  than  the 
other  texts  of  Scripture,  its  vicissitudes  have  been  greater,  and 
the  resulting  corruption  greater ;  but  we  stoutly  deny  that  it 
is  so  vitiated,  that  it  is  no  longer  an  authentic  text  of  Scrip- 
ture. Justin,  (martyr)  Origen,  Chrysostom,  the  pseudo  Atha- 
nasius,  Tertullian,  Jerome  and  others  accused  the  Jews  of 
corrupting  the  Scriptures.f 

♦Kennicott,  Diss.  II.  pp.  20-165. 


fS.  Justin,  c.  Try  ph.  71,  72,  etc.  (M.  6,  644);  S.  Iren.  c.  haer.  III.  21;  IV. 
13  (M.  7,  946,  1004);  Origen.  Ep.  ad  Afric.  9;  in  lerem.  horn.  16.  10  (M.  12,  65 


GENESIS. 


RITANUS. 


VERSIO    SAMARITANA. 


1, 


10 


II 


n 


P4 


'^m      }ii'^^'mJch^°s'^miii''^t*^'^!dJcm'^'KZA'^ii}A^  **p 


*iyV^«iW^*^^2A^*'^53^^*  ja^*^2^*^3[2yV'5(>^i^ii:  n 

2''=S'avm'=;k2'ij2wyt^:2tya[V'^^iiy*f^^v»'=iyvm 
2A^  "^  :iii5'=y*5t^?t^«5tv'=Syv2v5[a*5[v'=>i^'=y3r^iii^i2 

t:^^tiii2*:i^232*:i232ja   •a^v'^vV(Tr*3[v^4 
2  A  %li  V  ^  ♦  ^^t  i^i2*  ^a*  ^  A^  :j  w^  p*y  */7r'^  2*  '^/tt^v 

*3ti7r  iii^^\V^l2^*!2im^ert^';^*[rt^m*mZ/f*'^:i^A^<  "^'^  l2^ nooic:ftntque  lufigm 

thtl  m2*^m  ^^♦^iij^ar'ixnTa'p^3ii/2^*^v^A*2V3[^^liitfi  "]^w.4^wi'0''^,e^i«^fXj 

par f scicmaqujeCt) feminantem (0 progermmantpm  gcrniea  (i)  jilantam (Ocajus fruftificatio in icipfj cftC/) orbc ccsli 


TfiXT.ETVEll.SAM 
Tianflatio  Latina. 


CAP.  I 

U  Pmd>Ho  crcavit  De 
m  ccelum  &  terram.  Ter- 
ra auiem  ercm.  inank  <S 
vicua^  &  tcneb/if  tram 
fuperfaciem  abyffi  :fpin 
tut  qiioque  Del  (a)  fere- 
batur  fupc'f  aquas.  Du 
xitque  DettSj  fat  lux^  d? 
fa^a  eft  liixSt  viiLt  Dc- 
m  lucefn  qiiod  bond  effet ; 
Et  feparavit  Deios  hte 
tucem  &  inter .tmcbras. 
VdcavitqUe  Vius  lucem, 
dhm,  ^tincbras  voca- 
•vknoSlem:  Zt  folium  eft 
vcjpere,,  faSlumquc  «,? 
mane^dics  unm.  Etdix'y 
DeuSy  fiat  firmament ur,i 
in  medio  aquamm  :fepa- 
rctque  aqi{^  ab  ajiiif.  Et 
fecit  Deui  fimamentum 
feparavitque  aquas  que 
irant  Jtiker  prmamm 
'urn  ah  a^  qunc  erant 
fuper  firmamenium :  & 
^a^umejl  rta.  P^ocavlt- 
jue  Deus  firmimentum^ 
cesium :  EtfaSium  efi  ve- 
fm,  fdSiumque  eft  ma- 
ne^ diea  fecundus.  Et  di- 
xit DeuSj'  conp-egciitur 
aqitt^qux  fubccdofunt  i>i 
hcum  unumy&  (tppareat 
arida,:  &faSitmeliita. 
Ef  vocavptpeiis  arid'am^ 
icrram-^  &'ii^mregiitioni 
tqiiarii^T^ayitmma : 
iiit!>jtepe^.^iiod  bmu 
'fet.  Etjmtpeusyger- 
minet  te^a-^pbdm  vi- 
rmem,  (b)faciedtem  fe- 
men-y  <^  arborem  fhtt- 
lifcram't  facicntem  fru- 
^im  fecundum  jpeciem 
fuamycujus  femen  fit  in. 
ea  fuper  terram  :  &  fa- 
Cmm eftita^VTodux'itqm  [j 
terra  herbam  virenie  (c) 
facientem  femenfecundii 
(jpeciem  fua:&(d)arbori 
Uci:rftefm6iu(e)hAbcnti 
\ctKcn  in  femtipfayfccu/i- 
diim  (pedemfuam:  Et  zi- 
dit  Deus  quod  bonu  e[J'eti 
Etfaciumeftvcjpereyfa-  ij 
ciumq-y  eft  mane,  dies  ter- 
tins.  Et  dixit  Deusy{/a>it  j. 
luminana  in(f)firmamn- 
to  cceH,  ut  tuceant  jypc, 


Id. 


[X 


410  VERSIONS   OF  THE   SAMARITAN   PENTATEUCH. 

Martianay,  Nicolas  of  Lyra,  Paul  of  Burgos,  Salmeron, 
Melchior  Canus,  Morini  and  others  also  have  laid  this  accusa- 
tion upon  them.* 

Jerome,  in  another  place,  stoutly  defends  the  integrity  of 
the  Hebrew  text.  Augustine,  Sixtus  of  Sienna,  Bellarmine, 
Genebrard,  Mariana,  Richard  Simon  and  others  have  also  de- 
fended its  integrity.f 

In  studying  the  question,  we  are  led  to  the  following  con- 
clusions: I. — They  err  greatly  who  believe  that  any  extensive 
corruption  was  wrought  in  the  Hebrew  text  in  hatred  of  the 
Messiah.  That  such  corruption  could  not  have  been  wrought 
before  the  time  of  the  Christ  is  self-evident.  There  was  lack- 
ing the  motive  for  such  movement,  and,  moreover,  had  it  been 
done  in  hatred  of  the  Messiah,  he  would  have  charged  them 
with  this  great  crime.  That  such  corruption  were  wrought 
after  the  advent  of  Christ  is  disproven  first,  from  the  impossi- 
bility of  the  work.  There  were  many  codices  scattered  abroad 
through  the  world,  several  of  which  were  in  possession  of  those 
who  would  not  conspire  in  such  undertaking.  No  system 
would  suffice  to  reach  them  all.  And,  moreover,  some  of  the 
sublimest  of  the  messianic  prophecies  never  arrive,  in  their 
translations,  at  the  grandeur  that  they  have  in  the  original. 
We  believe,  also,  that  the  Providence  of  God  would  not  permit 
that  code  to  be  essentially  corrupted,  in  which  he  had  first 
covenanted  with  the  chosen  people.  But  it  is  not  our  mind  to 
deny  that  an  occasional  corruption  has  been  wilfully  fastened 
upon  the  Hebrew  text.  Hatred  of  the  Messiah  is  bound  up 
in  the  heart  of  the  Jew.  Now,  as  they  were  the  chief  cus- 
todians of  the  Hebrew  text,  it  is  quite  probable  that,  wherever 
the  reading  or  the  sense  was  doubtful,  they  would  incline  to 
that  reading  or  interpretation  which  was  less  favorable  to  the 
Messiah.  Again,  some  certain  texts  may  have  been  deliber- 
ately corrupted  in  some  codices,  whence  the  corruption  spread, 

sqq.;  13,  449  sqq.);  S.  Chrys.  in  Matth.  horn.  5,  2  (M.  57);  Ps.  Athan.  Synops. 
SS.  78  (in  textu  latino  tantum;  M.  28,  438);  TertuU.  de  cultu  fem.  I.  3  (M.  1, 
1308);  S.  Hier.  in  Gal.  3,  10  (M.  26,  357). 

*Raym.  Mart.  Pug.  fid.  II.  3,  9  p.  277;  Lyran.  et  Paulus  Burg,  in  Os.  9; 
Salmer.  Proleg.  4;  Cani  Loci  theol.  II.  13;  Morin.  Exercit.  bibl.  I.  1,  2  p.  7 
sqq.  eorum  et  aliorum  multorum  testimonia  recitat. 


fS.  Hier.  in  Is.  6,  9  (M.  24,  99);  S.  Aug.  De  Civ.  D.  XV.  13  (M.  41,  452); 
Bellarm.  De  verbo  Dei  II.  2;  Sim.  de  Muis  Triplex  assertio  pro  veritate 
hebraica.  0pp.  II.  p.  131  sqq.;  Genebrard  in  Ps.  21,  19;  Sixt.  Sen.  Biblioth. 
s.  VIII.  haer.  18;  loan.  Mariana  Pro  Vulgata  c.  7;  Rich.  Sim.  Hist.  crit.  du 
V.  T.  III.  18;  Marchini  De  divin.  et  canonic,  libr.  sacr.  I.  6;  Lamy  Introd.  in 
SS.  I.  p.  83  sqq.;  Reinke  Beitraege  VII.  p.  292  sqq.,  etc.  etc. 


THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.     411 

and  gradually  invaded  them  all.  This  we  admit,  but  it  is  in 
so  small  a  part  that  it  does  not  rob  the  great  text  of  its  value. 
We  reserve  for  the  exegesis  of  the  text  to  specify  the  places 
where  such  corruption  has  prevailed. 

The  corruption  of  one  passage,  or  the  attempt  to  obscure 
the  sense  of  a  passage,  would  have  sufficed  to  bring  upon  the 
Jews  the  accusations  spoken  of  in  the  Fathers.  Moreover,  it 
is  not  clear  that  the  Fathers  charged  them  with  changing  the 
Hebrew  text,  but  rather  with  obscuring  the  sense,  so  that  they 
rejected  the  Septuagint.  Justin,  it  is  true  (1.  c),  accuses  them 
of  deliberate  mutilations,  but  an  examination  of  the  passages 
does  not  substantiate  his  charge.  The  rejection  by  the  Jews 
of  the  deuterocanonical  books  might  also  have  been  taken  by 
the  Fathers  as  a  corruption  of  Scripture. 

We  believe,  therefore,  that  the  way  of  truth  lies  in  a 
middle  course.  We  admit  that  some  passages  of  the  Hebrew 
text  are  corrupted,  but  we  defend  that  in  the  main  it  is  authen- 
tic, and  of  the  greatest  value  for  him  who  would  arrive  at  the 
deeper  sense  of  the  message  of  the  Old  Law. 

Chapter  XVHI. 

The  Greek  Text  of  the  New  Testament. 

We  have  before  spoken  of  the  evidence  of  the  Providence 
of  God  in  bringing  about  a  state  of  peace  in  the  civilized  world, 
preceding  the  advent  of  Christ.  It  is  also  attributable  to  this 
benign  Providence  that  one  universal  tongue  was  the 
medium  of  thought  in  this  vast  extent  of  the  habitable  globe. 
When,  therefore,  the  Apostles  entered  upon  the  execution  of 
the  mandate  of  Christ  to  teach  all  nations,  they  adopted  the 
Greek  language  which  was  the  great  medium  of  thought 
among  the  nations. 

After  the  Macedonians  had  subjugated  the  whole  of  Greece, 
and  extended  their  dominion  into  Asia  and  Africa,  the  refined 
and  elegant  Attic  began  to  decline  ;  and  all  the  dialects  being 
by  degrees  mixed  together,  there  arose  a  certain  peculiar  lan- 
guage, called  the  Common,  and  also  the  Hellenic ;  but  more 
especially,  since  the  empire  of  the  Macedonians  was  the  chief 
cause  of  its  introduction  into  the  general  use  from  the  time  of 
Alexander  onwards,  it  was  called  the  (later)  Macedonic.  This 
dialect  was  composed  from  almost  all  the  dialects  of  Greece, 
together  with  very  many  foreign  words  borrowed  from  the 
Persians,  Syrians,  Hebrews,  and  other  nations,  who  became 
connected   with   the    Macedonian   people   after    the    age    of 


412     THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

Alexander.  Now,  of  this  Macedonian  dialect,  the  dialect  of 
Alexandria  (which  was  the  language  of  all  the  inhabitants  of 
that  city,  as  well  of  the  learned  as  of  the  Jews,)  was  a  degene- 
rate progeny  far  more  corrupt  than  the  common  Macedonian 
dialect.  This  last-mentioned  common  dialect,  being  the  cur- 
rent Greek  spoken  throughout  Western  Asia,  was  made  use  of 
by  the  writers  of  the  Greek  Testament.  In  consequence  of 
the  peculiarities  of  the  Hebrew  phraseology  being  discernible, 
it  has  by  some  philologers  been  termed  Hebraic-Greek,  and 
(from  the  Jews  having  acquired  the  Greek  language,  rather  by 
practice  than  by  grammar,  among  the  Greeks,  in  whose  coun- 
tries they  resided  in  large  communities,)  Hellenistic-Greek. 
The  propriety  of  this  appellation  was  severely  contested  to- 
wards the  close  of  the  seventeenth  and  in  the  early  part  of  the 
eighteenth  century ;  and  numerous  publications  were  written 
on  both  sides  of  the  question,  with  considerable  asperity, 
which,  together  with  the  controversy,  are  now  almost  forgotten. 
The  dispute,  however  interesting  to  the  philological  antiqua- 
rian, is,  after  all,  a  mere  "  strife  of  words :  "  and  as  the  appella- 
tions of  Helle?iistic  or  Hebraic-Greek,  and  of  Macedonian-Greek, 
are  sufficiently  correct  for  the  purpose  of  characterizing  the 
language  of  the  New  Testament,  one  or  other  of  them  is  now 
generally  adopted. 

Of  this  Hebraic  style,  the  Gospels  of  St.  Matthew  and  St. 
Mark  exhibit  strong  vestiges."  The  Epistles  of  St. 
James  and  Jude  are  somewhat  better,  but  even  these  are 
full  of  Hebraisms,  and  betray  in  other  respects  a  certain 
Hebrew  tone.  St.  Luke  has,  in  several  passages,  written  pure 
and  classic  Greek,  of  which  the  four  first  verses  of  his  Gospel 
may  be  given  as  an  instance  :  in  the  sequel,  where  he  describes 
the  actions  of  Christ,  he  has  very  harsh  Hebraisms,  yet  the 
style  is  more  agreeable  than  that  of  St.  Matthew  or  St.  Mark. 
In  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  he  is  not  free  from  Hebraisms, 
which  he  seems  to  have  never  studiously  avoided ;  but  his 
periods  are  more  classically  turned,  and  sometimes  possess 
beauty  devoid  of  art.  St.  John  has  numerous,  though  not  un- 
couth, Hebraisms  both  in  his  Gospel  and  Epistles;  but  he  has 
written  in  a  smooth  and  flowing  language,  and  surpasses  all 
the  Jewish  writers  in  the  excellence  of  narrative.  St.  Paul 
again  is  entirely  different  from  them  all ;  his  style  is  indeed 
neglected  and  full  of  Hebraisms,  but  he  has  avoided  the  con- 
cise and  verse-like  construction  of  the  Hebrew  language,  and 
has,  upon  the  whole,  a  considerable  share  of  the  roundness  of 
Grecian  composition.     It  is  evident  that  he  was  as  perfectly 


THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.     413 

acquainted  with  the  Greek  manner  of  expression  as  with  the 
Hebrew ;  and  he  has  introduced  them  alternately,  as  either  the 
one  or  the  other  suggested  itself  the  first,  or  was  the  best  ap- 
proved." 

This  diversity  of  style  and  idiom  in  the  sacred  writers  of 
the  New  Testament  affords  an  intrinsic  and  irresistible  evi- 
dence for  the  authenticity  of  the  books  which  pass  under  their 
names.  If  their  style  had  been  uniformly  the  same,  there 
would  be  good  reason  for  suspecting  that  they  had  all  com- 
bined together  when  they  wrote  ;  or,  else,  that  having  previ- 
ously concerted  what  they  should  teach,  one  of  them  had  com- 
mitted to  writing  their  system  of  doctrine.  In  ordinary  cases, 
when  there  is  a  difference  of  style  in  a  work  professing  to  be 
the  production  of  one  author,  we  have  reason  to  believe  that 
it  was  written  by  several  persons.  In  like  manner,  and  for  the 
very  same  reason,  when  books,  which  pass  under  the  names  of 
several  authors,  are  written  in  different  styles,  we  are  author- 
ized to  conclude  that  they  were  not  composed  by  one  person. 

Further,  if  the  New  Testament  had  been  written  with 
classic  purity,  if  it  had  presented  to  us  the  language  of  Iso- 
crates,  Demosthenes,  Xenophon,  or  Plutarch,  there  would  have 
been  just  grounds  for  suspicion  of  forgery  ;  and  it  might  with 
propriety  have  been  objected,  that  it  was  impossible  for 
Hebrews,  who  professed  to  be  men  of  no  learning,  to  have 
written  in  so  pure  and  excellent  a  style,  and,  consequently, 
that  the  books  which  were  ascribed  to  them  must  have  been 
the  invention  of  some  impostor.  The  diversity  of  style,  there- 
fore, which  is  observable  in  them,  so  far  from  being  any  objec- 
tion to  the  authenticity  of  the  New  Testament,  is  in  reality  a 
strong  argument  for  the  truth  and  sincerity  of  the  sacred 
writers,  and  of  the  authenticity  of  their  writings.  "  Very 
many  of  the  Greek  words  found  in  the  New  Testament,  are 
not  such  as  were  adopted  by  men  of  education,  and  the  higher 
and  more  polished  ranks  of  life,  but  such  as  were  in  use  with 
the  common  people.  Now  this  shows  that  the  writers  became 
acquainted  with  the  language,  in  consequence  of  an  actual 
intercourse  with  those  who  spoke  it,  rather  than  from  any 
study  of  books ;  and  that  intercourse  must  have  been  very 
much  confined  to  the  middling  or  even  lower  classes ;  since 
the  words  and  phrases  most  frequently  used  by  them  passed 
current  only  among  the  vulgar.  There  are  undoubtedly  many 
plain  intimations  given  throughout  these  books,  that  their 
writers  were  of  this  lower  class,  and  that  their  associates  were 
frequently  of  the  same  description ;  but  the  character  of  the 


414     THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

style  is  the  strongest  confirmation  possible  that  their  condi- 
tions were  not  higher  than  what  they  have  ascribed  to  them- 
selves." In  fact,  the  vulgarisms,  foreign  idioms,  and  other  dis- 
advantages and  defects,  which  some  critics  imagine  that  they 
have  discovered  in  the  Hebraic  Greek  of  the  New  Testament, 
"  are  assigned  by  the  inspired  writers  as  the  reasons  of  God's 
preference  of  it,  whose  thoughts  are  not  our  thoughts,  nor  his 
ways  our  ways.  Paul  argues,  that  the  success  of  the  preachers 
of  the  Gospel,  in  spite  of  the  absence  of  those  accomplish- 
ments in  language,  then  so  highly  valued,  was  an  evidence  of 
the  divine  power  and  energy  with  which  their  ministry  was 
accompanied.  He  did  not  address  them,  he  tells  us  (I.  Cor.  I. 
17.)  with  the  wisdom  of  words, — with  artificial  periods  and  a 
studied  elocution, — lest  the  cross  of  Christ  should  be  made  of 
none  effect ; — lest  to  human  eloquence  that  success  should  be 
ascribed,  which  ought  to  be  attributed  to  the  divinity  of  the 
doctrine  and  the  agency  of  the  spirit,  in  the  miracles  wrought 
in  support  of  it.  There  is  hardly  any  sentiment  which  he  is 
at  greater  pains  to  enforce.  He  used  none  of  the  enticing  or  per- 
suasive words  of  mans  wisdom.  Wherefore  ? — '  That  their  faith 
might  not  stand  in  the  wisdom  of  man,  but  in  the  power  of  God.' 
(I.  Cor.  n.  4,  5.)  Should  I  ask  what  was  the  reason  why  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  chose  for  the  instruments  of  that  most 
amazing  revolution  in  the  religious  systems  of  mankind,  men 
perfectly  illiterate  and  taken  out  of  the  lowest  class  of  the 
people  ?  Your  answer  to  this  will  serve  equally  for  an  answer 
to  that  other  question,  Why  did  the  Holy  Spirit  choose  to 
deliver  such  important  truths  in  the  barbarous  idiom  of  a  few 
obscure  Galilaeans,  and  not  in  the  politer  and  more  harmonious 
strains  of  Grecian  eloquence  ?  I  repeat  it,  the  answer  to  both 
questions  is  the  same — That  it  might  appear,  beyond  contra- 
diction, that  the  excellency  of  the  power  was  of  God,  and  not 
of  man." 

As  a  large  proportion  of  the  phrases  and  constructions  of 
the  New  Testament  is  pure  Greek,  that  is  to  say,  of  the  same 
degree  of  purity  as  the  Greek  which  was  spoken  in  Macedonia, 
and  that  in  which  Polybius  and  Appian  wrote  their  histories ; 
the  language  of  the  New  Testament  will  derive  considerable 
illustration  from  consulting  the  works  of  classic  writers,  and 
especially  from  diligently  collating  the  Septuagint  version  of 
the  Old  Testament. 

In  consequence  of  the  Macedonian  Greek  being  composed 
of  almost  all  the  dialects  of  Greece  (as  well  as  of  very  many 
foreign  words),  the  New  Testament  contains  examples  of  the 


THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.    415 

various  DIALECTS  occurring  in  the  Greek  language,  and  es- 
pecially of  the  Attic.  To  these,  some  have  added  the  poetic 
dialect,  chiefly,  it  should  seem,  because  there  are  a  few  passages 
cited  by  St.  Paul  from  the  ancient  Greek  poets,  in  Acts  XVII. 
28,  I.  Cor.  XV.  33,  and  Tit.  I.  12.  But  the  sacred  writers  of 
the  New  Testament,  being  Jews,  were  consequently  acquainted 
with  the  Hebrew  idioms,  and  also  with  the  common,  as  well  as 
with  the  appropriated  or  acquired  senses  of  the  words  of  that 
language.  Hence,  when  they  used  a  Greek  word,  as  corres- 
pondent to  a  Hebrew  one  of  like  signification,  they  employed 
it  as  the  Hebrew  word  was  used,  either  in  a  common  or 
appropriated  sense,  as  occasion  required.  The  whole  arrange- 
ment of  their  periods  "  is  regulated  according  to  the  Hebrew 
verses  (not  those  in  Hebrew  poetry,  but  such  as  are  found  in 
the  historical  books),  which  are  constructed  in  a  manner 
directly  opposite  to  the  roundness  of  Grecian  language,  and 
for  want  of  variety  have  an  endless  repetition  of  the  same  par- 
ticles." These  particular  idioms  are  termed  HEBRAISMS,  and 
their  nature  and  classes  have  been  treated  at  considerable 
length  by  various  writers. — (Home,  op.  cit.) 

Concerning  the  materials  used  in  ancient  writing  Montfau- 
con,  has  ably  written  in  his  Palaeographia  Graeca  (Paris  1708). 

"  Stone,  wood,  tablets  covered  with  wax,  the  bark  of  trees, 
the  dressed  skins  of  animals,  the  reed  papyrus,  paper  made  of 
cotton  or  linen,  are  the  chief  materials  on  which  writing  has 
been  impressed  at  different  periods  and  stages  of  civilization. 
The  most  ancient  manuscripts  of  the  New  Testament  now 
existing  are  composed  of  vellum  or  parchment  {fnembrana), 
the  term  vellum  being  strictly  applied  to  the  delicate  skins  of 
very  young  calves ;  and  parchment  (which  seems  to  be  a  cor- 
ruption of  f^^r/^/^r^^^w^rw^,  a  name  first  given  to  skins  pre- 
pared by  some  improved  process  for  Eumenes,  king  of  Per- 
gamus,  about  B.  C.  150)  to  the  integuments  of  sheep  or  goats. 
In  judging  of  the  date  of  a  manuscript  written  on  skins,  atten- 
tion must  be  paid  to  the  quality  of  the  material,  the  oldest 
being  almost  invariably  described  on  the  thinnest  and  whitest 
vellum  that  could  be  procured  ;  while  manuscripts  of  later  ages, 
being  usually  composed  of  parchment,  are  thick,  discoloured, 
and  coarsely  grained.  Thus  the  Codex  Friderico-Augustanus 
of  the  fourth  century  is  made  of  the  finest  skins  of  antelopes, 
the  leaves  being  so  large,  that  a  single  animal  would  furnish 
only  two  (Tischendorf,  Prolegomena,  §  i).  Its  contemporary, 
the  far-famed  Codex  Vaticanus,  challenges  universal  admiration 
for  the   beauty  of   its  vellum ;   every  visitor   at  the    British 


416    THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

Museum  can  observe  the  excellence  of  that  of  the  Codex 
Alexandrinus  of  the  fifth  century ;  that  of  the  Codex  Claro- 
montanus  of  the  sixth  century  is  no  less  remarkable ;  the 
material  of  those  purple-dyed  fragments  of  the  Gospels  which 
Tischendorf  denominates  N,  also  of  the  sixth  century,  is  so  subtle 
and  delicate  that  some  persons  have  mistaken  the  leaves 
preserved  in  England  (Brit.  Mus.  Cotton,  Titus)  for 
Egyptian  papyrus.  Paper  made  of  cotton  {charta  bombycina, 
called  also  charta  Damascena  from  its  place  of  manufacture) 
may  have  been  fabricated  in  the  ninth  or  tenth  century,  and 
linen  paper  [charta  proper)  as  early  as  the  twelfth  ;  but  they 
were  seldom  used  for  Biblical  manuscripts  earlier  than  the 
thirteenth,  and  had  not  entirely  displaced  parchment  at  the 
era  of  the  invention  of  printing,  about  a.  d.  1450.  Cotton 
paper  is  for  the  most  part  easily  distinguished  from  linen  by 
its  roughness  and  coarse  fibre,  some  of  the  early  linen  paper, 
both  glazed  and  unglazed,  is  of  a  very  fine  texture,  though 
perhaps  a  little  too  stout  and  crisp  for  convenient  use.  Lost 
portions  of  parchment  or  vellum  manuscripts  are  often  sup- 
plied in  paper  by  some  later  hand ;  and  the  Codex  Leices- 
trensis  of  the  fourteenth  century  is  unique  in  this  respect,  being 
composed  of  a  mixture  of  inferior  vellum  and  worse  paper, 
regularly  arranged  in  the  proportion  of  two  parchment  to  three 
paper  leaves,  recurring  alternately  throughout  the  whole 
volume." 

"  Although  parchment  was  in  occasional,  if  not  familiar 
use  at  the  period  when  the  New  Testament  was  written 
(ra  /StySXia,  /laXto-ra  ra?  /Aeft/8/3ava9,  II.  Tim.  IV.  13),  yet  the 
the  cheaper  and  more  perishable  papyrus  of  Egypt  was  chiefly 
employed  for  ordinary  purposes,  and  was  probably  what  is 
ment  by  x^prrj^  in  II.  John  V.  12.  This  vegetable  production 
had  been  long  used  for  literary  purposes  in  the  time  of  Hero- 
dotus (b.  C.  440),  and  that  not  only  in  Egypt  (Herod.  Hist.  II. 
100)  but  elsewhere,  for  he  expressly  states  that  the  lonians, 
for  lack  of  byblus,  had  been  compelled  to  have  recourse  to 
the  skins  of  goats  and  sheep  (v.  58).  We  find  a  minute,  if  not 
a  very  clear  description  of  the  mode  of  preparing  the  papyrus 
for  the  scribe  in  the  works  of  the  elder  Pliny  (Hist.  Nat.  I^ 
XIII.  C.  II,  12).  Its  frail  and  brittle  quality  has  no  doubt 
caused  us  the  loss  of  some  of  the  choicest  treasures  of  ancient 
literature ;  the  papyri  which  yet  survive  in  the  museums  of 
Europe  owe  their  preservation  to  the  accidental  circumstance 
of  having  been  buried  in  the  tombs  of  Thebes,  or  beneath 
the  wreck  of  Herculaneum.     As  we  before  intimated,  no  exist- 


THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.     417 

ing  manuscript  of  the  New  Testament  is  written  on  papyrus, 
nor  can  the  earliest  we  possess  on  vellum  be  dated  higher  than 
the  middle  of  the  fourth  century." 

"  We  have  some  grounds  for  suspecting  that  papyrus  was 
not  over  plentiful  even  in  the  best  time  of  the  Roman  domin- 
ion ;  and  it  may  be  readily  imagined  that  vellum  (especially 
that  fine  sort  by  praiseworthy  custom  required  for  copies  of 
Holy  Scripture)  could  never  have  been  otherwise  than  scarce 
and  dear.  Hence  arose  at  a  very  early  period  of  the  Christian 
era,  the  practice  and  almost  the  necessity  of  erasing  ancient 
writing  from  skins,  in  order  to  make  room  for  works  in  which 
the  living  generation  felt  more  interest.  This  process  of  de- 
struction, however,  was  seldom  so  fully  carried  out,  but  that 
the  strokes  of  the  elder  hand  might  still  be  traced,  more  or  less 
completely,  under  the  more  modern  writing.  Such  manu- 
scripts are  called  codices  rescripti  or  palimpsests  {7ra\ifji-\jrr)a-Ta), 
and  several  of  the  most  precious  monuments  of  sacred  learning 
are  of  this  description.  The  Codex  Ephraemi  at  Paris  con- 
tains large  fragments  both  of  the  Old  and  the  New  Testament 
under  the  later  Greek  works  of  St.  Ephraem  the  Syrian :  and 
the  Codex  Nitriensis,  recently  disinterred  from  a  monastery  in 
the  Egyptian  desert  and  brought  to  the  British  Museum,  com- 
prises a  portion  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel,  nearly  obliterated,  and 
covered  over  by  a  Syriac  treatise  of  Severus  of  Antioch  against 
Grammaticus,  comparatively  of  no  value  whatever.  It  will  be 
easily  believed  that  the  collating  or  transcribing  of  palimpsests 
has  cost  much  toil  and  patience  to  those  whose  loving  zeal  has 
led  them  to  the  attempt :  and  after  all  their  true  readings  will 
be  sometimes  (not  often)  rather  uncertain,  even  though  chemi- 
cal mixtures  (such  as  prussiate  of  potash  or  the  tinctura 
Giobertind)  have  recently  been  applied,  with  much  success,  to 
restore  the  faded  lines  and  letters  of  these  venerable  records." 

"  We  need  say  but  little  of  a  practice  which  St.  Jerome 
and  others  speak  of  as  prevalent  towards  the  end  of  the  fourth 
century,  that  of  dyeing  the  vellum  purple,  and  of  stamping 
rather  than  writing  the  letters  in  silver  and  gold.  The  Cotton 
fragment  of  the  Gospels,  is  one  of  the  few  remain- 
ing copies  of  this  kind,  and  it  is  not  unlikely  that  the 
great  Dublin  palimpsest  of  St.  Matthew  owes  its  pres- 
ent wretched  discoloration  to  some  such  dye.  We  care 
for  them  only  as  they  serve  to  indicate  the  reverence  paid  to 
the  Scriptures  by  men  of  old.  The  style,  however,  of  the 
pictures,  illustrations,  arabesques  and  initial  ornaments  that 
prevail  in  later  copies  from  the  eighth  century  downwards, 

AA 


418     THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

whose  colors  and  gilding  are  sometimes  as  fresh  and  bright 
as  if  laid  on  but  yesterday,  will  not  only  interest  the  student 
by  tending  to  throw  light  on  mediaeval  art  and  habits  and 
modes  of  thought,  but  will  often  fix  the  date  of  the  books 
which  contain  them  with  a  precision  otherwise  quite  beyond 
our  reach." 

"  The  ink  used  in  the  most  ancient  manuscripts  has  unfor- 
tunately for  the  most  part  turned  red  or  brown,  very  pale,  or 
peeled  off,  or  eaten  through  the  vellum ;  so  that  in  many  cases 
(as  in  the  Codex  Vaticanus  itself)  a  later  hand  has  ruthlessly 
retraced  the  letter,  and  given  a  false  semblance  of  coarseness 
or  carelessness  to  the  original  writing.  In  such  instances  a 
few  passages  will  usually  remain  untouched,  just  as  the  first 
scribe  left  them,  and  from  the  study  of  these  a  right  no- 
tion can  be  formed  of  the  primitive  condition  of  the  rest. 
From  the  seventh  century  downwards  it  is  said  that  the  in- 
gredients of  ink  have  but  little  changed.  The  base  has  been 
soot,  or  lamp  black  made  of  burnt  shavings  of  ivory,  mixed 
with  wine-lees  or  gum,  and  subsequently  sepia  or  alum. 
Vitriol  and  gall-nuts  are  now  added,  the  mineral  serving  to  fix 
the  vegetable  ingredients.  In  many  manuscripts  of  about  the 
twelfth  century  (e.  g.  Gonville  and  Caius  MS.,  59  of  the 
Gospels)  we  observe  what  seems  to  be,  and  very  well  may  be, 
the  Indian  ink  of  commerce,  still  preserving  a  beautiful  jet 
black  on  the  inner  and  smoother  side  of  the  parchment,  and 
washed  out  rather  than  erased,  whenever  corrections  were 
desired.  The  coloured  inks  (red,  green,  blue  or  purple)  are 
often  quite  brilliant  to  this  day ;  the  four  red  lines  which  stand 
at  the  head  of  each  column  of  the  first  page  of  the  Codex 
Alexandrinus  are  far  more  legible  than  the  portions  in  black 
ink  below  them,  yet  are  undoubtedly  written  by  the  same 
hand." 

"  While  papyrus  (%a/3T779)  remained  in  common  use,  the 
chief  instrument  employed  was  probably  a  reed  {KdXafio<i,  3 
John  V.  13),  such  as  are  common  in  the  East  at  present ;  a  few 
existing  manuscripts  (e.  g.  the  Codd.  Leicestrensis  and  Lam- 
beth 1350)  appear  to  have  thus  been  written.  Yet  the  firmness 
and  regularity  of  the  strokes,  which  often  remain  impressed  on 
the  vellum  or  paper  after  the  ink  has  utterly  gone,  prove  that 
in  the  great  majority  of  cases  a  metal  pen  {stylus)  was  pre- 
ferred. We  must  add  to  our  list  of  writing  materials,  a  bodkin 
or  needle  {acus\  by  means  of  which  and  a  ruler,  the  blank  leaf 
was  carefully  divided  into  columns  and  lines,  whose  regularity 
much  enhances  the  beauty  of  our  best  copies.     The  vestiges 


THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.     419 

of  such  points  and  marks  may  yet  be  seen  deeply  indented  on 
the  surface  of  nearly  all  manuscripts,  those  on  one  side  of  each 
leaf  being  usually  sufficiently  visible  to  guide  the  scribe  when 
he  came  to  write  on  the  reverse." 

**  Little  needs  be  said  respecting  the  form  of  manuscripts, 
which  in  this  particular  much  resemble  printed  books.  A  few 
are  in  large  folio ;  the  greater  part  in  small  folio  or  quarto,  the 
prevailing  shape  being  a  quarto,  whose  height  but  little  exceeds 
its  breadth  ;  some  are  octavo,  and  an  inconsiderable  number 
smaller  still.  In  some  copies  the  sheets  have  marks  in  the  lower 
margin  of  their  first  or  last  pages,  like  the  signatures  of  a 
modern  volume,  the  folio  at  intervals  of  four,  the  quarto  at 
intervals  of  eight  leaves,  as  in  the  Codex  Augiensis  of  St. 
Paul's  Epistles  (F).  Not  to  speak  at  present  of  those  manu- 
scripts which  have  a  Latin  translation  in  a  column  parallel  to 
the  Greek,  as  the  Codex  Bezae,  the  Codex  Laudianus  of  the 
Acts,  and  the  Codices  Claromontanus  and  Augiensis  of  St. 
Paul,  many  copies  of  every  age  have  two  Greek  columns  on 
each  page ;  of  these  the  Codex  Alexandrinus  is  the  oldest :  the 
Codex  Vaticanus  has  three  columns  on  a  page,  the  Codex 
Friderico-Augustanus  four.  The  unique  arrangement  of  these 
last  two  has  been  urged  as  an  argument  for  their  higher  an- 
tiquity, as  if  they  were  designed  to  imitate  rolled  books,  whose 
several  skins  or  leaves  were  fastened  together  lenghtwise,  so 
that  their  contents  always  appeared  in  parallel  columns  ;  they 
were  kept  in  scrolls  which  were  unrolled  at  one  end  for  reading, 
and  when  read  rolled  up  at  the  other.  This  fashion  prevails  in 
the  papyrus  fragments  yet  remaining,  and  in  the  most  ven- 
erated copies  of  the  Old  Testament  preserved  in  Jewish 
synagogues."  (Scrivener,  Introduction  to  the  Criticism  of 
New  Testament,  Chap.  II.) 

The  Scriptures  were  not  formerly  as  now  divided  into  chap- 
ters and  verses.  The  mode  of  designating  particular  passages 
was  by  specifying  the  theme.  Thus  Jesus  Christ  designates 
to  the  sadducees  the  passage  from  Exodus  treating  of  the 
resurrection  of  the  dead,  Mark  XII.  26 :  "  And  as  concerning 
the  dead  that  they  rise  again,  have  you  not  read  in  the  book 
of  Moses,  how  in  the  bush,  God  spoke  to  him  saying  :  '  I  am 
the  God  of  Abraham,  and  the  God  of  Isaac,  and  the  God  of 
Jacob?'"  This  method  presupposed  those  to  whom  the  dis- 
course was  directed  to  be  much  versed  in  the  Scriptures.  The 
first  attempt  at  fixed  divisions  of  Scripture  seems  to  have  been 
made  by  Ammonius  of  Alexandria,  the  contemporary  of 
Origen.     The  first  attempts  were  rude  and  imperfect.     In  the 


420  THE   GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

thirteenth  century  Cardinal  Hugh  of  S.  Caro,  the  inventor  of 
the  Concordances  of  Scripture,  is  believed  to  have  been  the 
first  to  CHAPTER  the  Bible.  Some,  however,  attribute  this 
work  to  Stephen  Langton,  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  of 
the  same  century.  This  mode  of  division  passed  from  the 
Vulgate  to  the  primal  texts,  and  later  even  the  Hebrew  text 
was  thus  divided.  The  subdivisions  of  the  chapters  were  in 
this  system  marked  by  the  letters  of  the  alphabet.  The  dis- 
tinction and  enumeration  of  the  verses  is  due  to  Robert 
Etienne,  the  celebrated  printer  of  Paris,  who  first  thus  divided 
the  Holy  Scriptures  in  his  edition  of  the  Vulgate  in  1548.  This 
system  was  also  soon  applied  to  all  the  texts  of  Scripture. 
The  division  of  the  Scriptures  into  chapters  and  verses,  is  the 
pure  work  of  man,  and  subject  to  critical  analysis,  and  may  be 
altered  if  good  data  warrant  a  different  division.  In  fact  in 
many  cases  it  is  expedient  to  change  the  divisions  of  Robert 
Etienne.  :;. 

The  Scriptures  were  also  in  the  beginning  written  without 
any  elements  of  punctuation  or  accentuation.  By  this  mode 
of  writing  the  page  presented  one  compact  mass  of  characters 
and  their  division  and  construction  into  words  were  left  to  the 
reader's  judgment.     See  plate  on  page  445. 

This  mode  of  writing  remained  in  vogue  till  about  the 
ninth  century  of  the  Christian  Era.     As  by  different  groupings 
and  combinations  of  characters,  different  meanings   resulted 
from  the  text,  this  was  a  fertile  cause  of  error,  and  many  of  • 
the  variantia  are  traceable  to  this  cause. 

A  system  of  accentuation  had  been  invented  by  Aristo- 
phanes of  Byzantium  in  the  second  century  before  Christ, 
which  was  employed  by  the  Greek  grammarians  in  works  of 
profane  argument.  Its  application  to  the  Sacred  Codices  was 
rare.  St.  Epiphanius  testifies  that  certain  ones  have  thus 
written  copies  of  the  Alexandrine  Codex  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, but  Tischendorf  affirms  that  no  Codex  anterior  to  the 
eighth  century  is  written  with  accents.  It  is  only  after  the 
tenth  century  that  accentuation  becomes  general.  This  was 
also  a  source  of  variantia,  as  the  different  positions  of  the 
accents  oft  induced  a  different  meaning.  In  some  of  the  old 
codices,  as  for  instance  the  Codex  Sinaiticus  ^,  the  spiritus  lenis 
and  gravis  are  indicated,  but  this  is  judged  by  Tischendorf  to 
be  the  work  of  a  later  hand.  More  ancient  than  the  use  of 
either  accents  or  signs  of  punctuation  is  the  use  of  the  lineola, 
— ,  to  designate  the  abbreviation  of  certain  words  of  more 
frequent    occurance.      Thus:     @C    for   06O9,   KG  for   KvpLo<i, 


THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.     421 


UNA  for  irvei/Ma.  The  iota  subscript  is  never  found  in  the 
old  Codices  of  Holy  Writ,  hence  another  cause  of  error.  How 
these  diflferent  factors  effected  many  divergencies  in  the  Sacred 
text,  may  be  inferred  from  the  following  examples. 

The  group   of   letters  avrr]  became  avrr)  or  avrrj  or  avrrj', 

every  one  of  different  import  by  modifications  which  can  only 
be  based  upon  the  fallible,  varying  judgment  of  man.  The 
opening  verses  of  St.  John's  Gospel  form  a  good  specimen  of 
the  difference  in  interpretation  which  may  result  from  different 
insertion  of  the  sign  of  punctuation. 
'X^coph  avTOv  iyevero  ovSe  ev   o   yeyovev  ev   avra.    ^wrj   rfv   ktK, 

The  Vulgate  and  its  dependent  versions  insert  the  period 
after  yeyovev.  "  Without  him  was  made  nothing  that  was 
made.  In  him  was  life,  etc."  S.  Irenaeus,  St.  Clement  of 
Alexandria,  Origen,  St,  Athanasius  and  others  close  the  period 
after  ovSe  ev ;  whence  would  result :  "  Without  him  was  made 
nothing.  What  was  made  was  life  in  him."  This  construc- 
tion, though  in  my  judgment  improbable,  has  found  favor  with 
many  Thomists.  No  doubt  the  authority  of  St.  Augustine, 
who  held  this  mode  of  reading,  drew  the  Thomists  to 
adopt  it. 

To  remove  this  cause  of  error  Origen  in  his  Hexapla 
divided  the  text  into  arixoi,  and  this  mode  of  writing  was 
termed  (TTLX''^tieTpia.  In  this  stichometric  arrangement  of  the 
text,  every  complete  phrase  occupied  a  separate  line. 

St.  Jerome  wrote  in  this  manner  his  version  of  the  propheti- 
cal books  of  the  Old  Testament.  In  the  middle  of  the  5th 
century  Euthalius,  a  deacon  of  Alexandria,  employed  this 
mode  of  writing  in  his  successive  editions  of  the  Pauline 
Epistles,  the  Catholic  Epistles  and  the  Acts,  and  lastly  to  the 
Gospels.  As  this  served  well  the  convenience  of  the  reader  it 
became  quite  general  in  those  early  codices,  although  but  few 
thus  written  are  extant  to-day.  Principal  among  those  that 
remain  are  the  Codex  Beza  of  Cambridge  (D)  of  the  Gospels 
and  Acts  ;  the  Codex  of  Clermont  (D)  of  the  Pauline  Epistles ; 
the  Codex  of  St.  Germain  (E)  of  the  Pauline  Epistles ;  and  the 
Codex  Coislinianus  (H)  of  the  Pauline  Epistles. 

This  mode  of  writing,  though  very  convenient  to  the 
reader,  required  much  material  upon  which  to  be  written,  as 
large  portions  of  the  superficies  remained  blank. 

We  reproduce  on  the  following  page  a  specimen  of  Sticho- 
metry  from  the  Codex  of  Beza:  Math.  XXIV;  51-XXV.  6, 
with  English  translation  in  same  form  of  writing. 


422  THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  • 

K^lOBJYrMOCTCONOAOMTCON  1 

CZH    :   TOT60MOlCU|9HCeT\lHBXCl\eiXTCUNOYJAvNCDN 
A6KA.lT^jeGNlOlC  ^wlTlNieCAABOYC^I 

exH^eoMelC^T!^^s^THCl^JToYNY^^4^'QY 
k\ithcnym4^hc 

Tl6NT6A662A.Y'T^CONHCXhJMCDjM 
J<^HT6MTe<j>JONJlMOl 

^loY^JMCDJMA^BoY<^M•*^^cA^MT^^A^c^Y^^^^ 
oYKex^BOMMeee^Y'^^^^^^^'^^ 

eNTQic  ^irr6ioic^.Y"^^^^'^'^^4*J'^^'^^" 
exXBONJeAeoMeMTOic^rreioic 

MeTXTCONlAXMTT^ACOM^Y'^^^^ 

XJOMl2;o^^ToCAeToY^^Y^4^'OY 

6KSYC"T^^2M^TrACMK^l6K^e6YAO>^ 

IV16CHCA6MYJ<T0CJKJ^Y^'^^^'"0^^^ 

ANDGNASHINGOFTEETH 

THENSHALLTHEKINGDOMOFHEAVENBELIKENEDUNTO 

TENVIRGINSWHICHTOOK 

THEIRLAMPS 

ANDWENTFORTHTOMEETTHEBRIDEGROOM 

ANDBRIDE 

ANDFIVEOFTHEMWEREFOOLISH 

ANDFIVEWEREWISE 

THEYTHATWEREFOOLISHTOOKTHEIRLAMPS 

ANDTOOKNOOILWITHTHEMINTHEIRVESSELS 

BUTTHEWISE 

TOOKOILINTHEIRVESSELS 

WITHTHEIRLAMPS 

WHILETHEBRIDEGROOMTARRIED 

THEYALLSLUMBEREDANDSLEPT 

ANDATMIDNIGHTTHEREWASACRYMADE 


THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.     423 

Hence,  it  was  modified  so  that  the  (ttCxol  were  separated 
by  points.  From  the  seventh  century  the  custom  began  to 
prevail  to  indicate  the  greater  or  less  textual  division  by 
different  location  of  the  point.  The  KOfi/xa  or  briefest  division 
was  indicated  by  locating  the  (.)  punctum  at  the  base  of  the 
line ;  the  k(o\ov  (•)  or  middle  division,  by  interposing  it  mid- 
way between  the  base  and  top ;  while  the  full  period  was 
terminated  by  the  punctum  (•)  at  the  top  of  the  line.  Al- 
though this  was  the  most  ordinary  mode  in  those  times,  some- 
times the  point  at  the  base  designated  the  full  period,  and  vice 
versa.  Our  modern  mode  of  punctuation  did  not  come  into 
use  till  after  the  invention  of  printing  in  the  15th  century. 

The  autographs  of  the  New  Testament  perished  in  the  first 
centuries  of  the  Christian  era.  There  is  almost  a  complete 
silence  in  tradition  concerning  any  such  original  writings. 
Some  adduce  a  passage  from  TertuUian  to  prove  that  the 
autographs  were  preserved  in  his  day. 

"  Percurre  Ecclesias  Apostolicas,  apud  quas  ipsae  adhuc 
Cathedrae  Apostolorum  suis  locis  praesident,  apud  quas  ipsae 
Authenticae  Literae  eorum  recitantur,  sonantes  vocem,  et 
repraesentantes  faciem  uniuscujusque.  Proximo  est  tibi 
Achaia,  habes  Corinthum.  Si  non  long^  es  a  Macedonia,  habes 
Philippos,  habes  Thessalonicenses.  Si  potes  in  Asiam  tendere, 
habes  Ephesum.  Si  autem  Italiae  adjaces,  habes  Romam." 
(De    Praescriptione    Haereticorum,    c.    36). 

Attempts  have  been  made,  indeed,  and  that  by  very  eminent 
writers,  to  reduce  the  term  ''Authenticae  Literae"  to  mean 
nothing  more  than  "  genuine,  unadulterated  Epistles,"  or  even 
the  authentic  Greek  as  opposed  to  the  Latin  translation. 

Others  defend  that  he  evidently  speaks  of  the  autographs. 
But  the  weight  of  evidence  is  clearly  in  favor  of  the  former 
opinion.  TertuUian  was  not  ignorant  that  the  sacred  writers 
did  not  commit  their  thoughts  to  writing  with  their  own 
hands;  and,  therefore,  faithful  copies  of  the  original  docu- 
ments, if  faithfully  executed,  would  be  as  authentic  as  the 
first  documents.  And  for  this  cause  also,  greater  care  was 
not  bestowed  on  the  autographs,  for  the  faithful  copies  were 
held  in  equal  veneration. 

The  dissemination  of  the  writings  of  the  Apostles  began 
immediately,  by  means  of  manuscript  copies,  and  a  great 
number  of  these  was  soon  spread  abroad  through  the 
churches.  Owing  to  various  causes,  errors  crept  into  the 
copied  texts.  Hence  Origen  complains  :  "  Even  now,  through 
the  inattention  of  certain  transcribers,  and  the  rash  temerity 


424     THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

of  those  who  would  amend  the  Scriptures,  and  the  arbitrary 
additions  and  suppressions  of  others,  a  great  diversity  has 
come  into  our  Scriptures."  As  time  went  on  the  evil  grew. 
In  fact,  those  early  Christians,  attending  mainly  to  the  sense, 
were  not  deterred  by  an  excessive  reverence  from  slight 
textual  changes,  which  affected  not  the  sense.  By  compara- 
tive criticism,  many  of  these  variants  have  been  brought  to 
light.  The  English  critic  Mill  estimated  that  the  discovered 
different  readings  of  the  New  Testament  in  his  day  amounted 
to  thirty  thousand  ;  they  probably  to-day  are  four  times  that 
number.  But  the  great  mass  of  these  variants  leave  intact 
the  substantial  correctness  of  the  sacred  text,  so  that  the 
remark  of  Bently  is  just : 

"  *  The  real  text  of  the  sacred  writers  does  not  now  (since 
the  originals  have  been  so  long  lost)  lie  in  any  MS.  or  edition, 
but  is  dispersed  in  them  all.  'Tis  competently  exact  indeed 
in  the  worst  MS.  now  extant  ;  nor  is  one  article  of  faith  or 
moral  precept  either  perverted  or  lost  in  them  ;  choose  as  awk- 
wardly as  you  will,  choose  the  worst  by  design,  out  of  the 
whole  lump  of  readings.'  Or  again :  '  Make  your  30,000 
[variations]  as  many  more,  if  numbers  of  copies  can  ever  reach 
that  sum :  all  the  better  to  a  knowing  and  serious  reader,  who 
is  thereby  more  richly  furnished  to  select  what  he  sees  genuine. 
But  even  put  them  into  the  hands  of  a  knave  or  a  fool,  and 
yet  with  the  most  sinistrous  and  absurd  choice,  he  shall  not 
extinguish  the  light  of  any  one  chapter,  nor  so  disguise  Christ- 
ianity, but  that  every  feature  of  it  will  still  be  the  same.'* 
Thus  hath  God's  Providence  kept  from  harm  the  treasure  of 
His  written  word,  so  far  as  is  needful  for  the  quiet  assurance 
of  His  Church  and  people." 

Perhaps  the  gravest  variants  in  the  New  Testament  are  in 
regard  to  Mark  XVI.  9-16,  and  John  VII.  53,  VIII.  11.  In 
our  exegesis  of  these  passages  we  shall  defend  the  authenticity 
that  was  accorded  these  passages  by  the  Council  of  Trent. 

We  here  adduce  several  classes  of  errors  from  Scrivener 
(1.  c).  The  practical  application  of  these  heads  to  the  text 
we  reserve  for  our  treatise  on  Exegesis  of  the  New  Testament. 

"  Sometimes,  a  shorter  passage  or  mere  clause,  whether 
inserted  or  not  in  our  printed  books,  may  have  appeared 
originally  in  a  form  of  a  marginal  note,  and  from  the  margin 
have  crept  into  the  text,  through  the  wrong  judgment  or  mere 
oversight  of  the  scribe." 

* ' '  Remarks  upon  a  late  Discourse  of  Free  Thinking  by  Phileleutherus 
Lipsiensis,"  Part  I.  section  32. 


THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.     425 

"  Or  a  genuine  clause  is  lost  by  means  of  what  is  technically 
called  Homceoteleuton  {6/j,oiot€\€vtov),  when  the  clause  ends  in 
the  same  word  as  closed  the  preceding  sentence,  and  the  tran- 
scribers's  eye  has  wandered  from  the  one  to  the  other,  to  the 
entire  omission  of  the  whole  passage  lying  between  them. 
This  source  of  error  is  familiar  to  all  who  are  engaged  in  copy- 
ing writing,  and  is  far  more  serious  than  might  be  supposed, 
prior  to  experience." 

"  Numerous  variations  occur  in  the  order  of  words,  the 
sense  being  slightly  or  not  at  all  affected  ;  on  which  account 
this  species  of  various  readings  was  at  first  much  neglected  by 
collators." 

"  Sometimes  the  scribe  has  mistaken  one  word  for  another, 
which  differs  from  it  only  in  one  or  two  letters.  This  happens 
chiefly  in  cases  when  the  uncial  or  capital  letters  in  which  the 
oldest  manuscripts  are  written,  resemble  each  other,  except  in 
some  fine  stroke  which  may  have  decayed  through  age. 
Hence  in  Mark  V.  14  we  find  ANHrFEIAAN  or  AHHr. 
TEIAAN  ;  in  Luke  XVI.  20  HAKXIMENOC  or  EIAKHME- 
NOC  ;  so  we  read  AautS  or  Aa^lS  indifferently,  as  in  the  later 
or  cursive  character,  /S  and  v  have  nearly  the  same  shape. 
Akin  to  these  errors  of  the  eye  are  such  transpositions  as 
EAABON  for  EBAAON  or  EBAAAON,  Mark  XIV.  65: 
omissions  or  insertions  of  the  same  or  similar  letters,  as 
EMACCflNTO  or  EMACHNTO  Apoc  .XVI.  lo;  AFAAAIA- 
C0HNAI  or  ArAAAIA@HNAI  John  V.  35  ;  nPOEA0ftN 
or  nPOCEA0flN  Matth.  XXVI.  39;  Mark  XIV.  35  :  or  the 
dropping  or  repetition  of  the  same  or  a  similar  syllable,  as 
EKBAAAONTAAAIMONIA  or  EKBAAAONTATAAAIMO- 
NIA  Luke  IX.  49  ;  OTAEAEAOHACTAI  or  OTAEAOHAC- 
TAI  II.  Cor.  III.  10;  AHAHEHEAEXETO  or  AnEHEAEX- 
ETO  I.  Peter  III.  20.  It  is  easy  to  see  how  the  ancient  prac- 
tice of  writing  uncial  letters  without  leaving  a  space  between 
the  words  must  have  increased  the  risk  of  such  variations  as 
the  foregoing." 

"Another  source  of  error  is  described  by  some  critics  as 
proceeding  ex  ore  dictantis,  in  consequence  of  the  scribe  writ- 
ing from  dictation,  without  having  a  copy  before  him.  I  am 
not,  however,  very  willing  to  believe  that  manuscripts  of  the 
better  class  were  executed  on  so  slovenly  and  careless  a  plan. 
It  seems  more  simple  to  account  for  the  itacisms,  or  confusion 
of  certain  vowels  and  diphthongs  having  nearly  the  same  sounds 
which  exist  more  or  less  in  manuscripts  of  every  age,  by  assum- 


426     THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

ing  that  a  vicious  pronunciation  gradually  led  to  a  loose  mode 
of  orthography  adapted  to  it.  Certain  it  is  that  itacisms  are 
much  more  plentiful  in  the  original  subscriptions  and  marginal 
notes  of  the  writers  of  mediaeval  books,  than  in  the  text  which 
they  copied  from  older  documents.  Itacisms  prevailed  the 
most  extensively  from  the  eighth  to  the  twelfth  century,  but 
not  by  any  means  during  that  period  exclusively.  In  the  most 
ancient  manuscripts  the  principal  changes  are  between  l  and  et, 
at  and  e :  in  later  times  97  l  and  et,  r]  01  and  v,  even  o  and  m,  rj 
and  e  are  used  almost  promiscuously.  Hence  it  arises  that  a 
very  large  proportion  of  the  various  readings  brought  together 
by  collators  are  of  this  description,  and  although  in  the  vast 
majority  of  instances  they  serve  but  to  illustrate  the  character 
of  the  manuscripts  which  exhibit  them,  or  the  fashion  of  the 
age  in  which  they  were  written,  they  sometimes  affect  the 
grammatical  form." 

"  A  more  extensive  and  perplexing  species  of  various  read- 
ing arises  from  bringing  into  the  text  of  one  (chiefly  of  the 
three  earlier)  Evangelist  expressions  or  whole  sentences  which 
of  right  belong  not  to  him,  but  to  one  or  both  the  others. 
This  natural  tendency  to  assimilate  the  several  Gospels  must 
have  been  aggravated  by  the  laudable  efforts  of  Biblical 
scholars  (beginning  with  Tatian's  Am  recradpcDv  in  the  second 
century)  to  construct  a  satisfactory  Harmony  of  them  all. 
Some  of  these  variations  also  may  possibly  have  been  mere 
marginal  notes  in  the  first  instance." 

"  In  like  manner  transcribers  sometimes  quote  passages 
from  the  Old  Testament  more  fully  than  the  writers  of 
the  New  Testament  had  judged  necessary  for  their  pur- 
pose." 

"  Synonymous  words  are  often  interchanged,  and  so 
from  various  readings,  the  sense  undergoes  some  slight 
and  refined  modification,  or  else  remains  quite  un- 
altered." 

•*  An  irregular,  obscure,  or  incomplete  construction  will 
be  explained  or  supplied  in  the  margin  by  words  that  are  sub- 
sequently brought  into  the  text." 

"  Hence,  too,  arises  the  habit  of  changing  ancient  dialectic 
forms  into  those  in  vogue  in  the  transcriber's  age." 

"  Trifling  variations  in  spelling,  though  very  proper  to  be 
noted  by  a  faithful  collator,  are  obviously  of  little  consequence." 

"  A  large  portion  of  our  various  readings  arises  from  the 
omission  or  insertion  of  such  words  as  cause  little  appreciable 
difference  in  the  sense." 


THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.     427 

"  Manuscripts  greatly  fluctuate  in  adding  and  rejecting  the 
Greek  article,  and  the  sense  is  often  seriously  influenced  by 
these  variations,  though  they  seem  so  minute." 

"  Slips  of  the  pen,  whereby  words  are  manifestly  lost  or 
repeated,  mis-spelt  or  half-finished,  though  of  no  service  to  the 
critic,  must  yet  be  noted  by  a  faithful  collator,  as  they  will 
occasionally  throw  light  on  the  history  of  some  particular  copy 
in  connection  with  others,  and  always  indicate  the  degree  of 
care  or  skill  employed  by  the  scribe,  and  consequently  the 
weight  due  to  his  general  testimony." 

"  The  copyist  may  be  tempted  to  foresake  his  proper  func- 
tion for  that  of  a  reviser,  or  critical  collector.  He  may  simply 
omit  what  he  does  not  understand  (e.  g.  to  fiaprvpiov  I.  Tim. 
II.  6.),  or  may  attempt  to  get  over  a  difficulty  by  inversions 
and  other  changes.  Thus  the  /jLva-r'qpcov  spoken  of  by  St.  Paul  I. 
Cor.  XV.  51,  which  rightly  stands  in  the  received  text  iravre'; 
fiev  ov  KOLfxrjOTjao/iieOa,  7rdvT€<i  Se  aWayqaofMeOa  was  easily  varied 
into  Traz/re?  /coLfjujjdrjao/Meda,  ov  Trdvre^  Se  aWayTjaofieda,  as  if  in 
mere  perplexity." 

"  It  is  very  possible  that  some  scattered  readings  cannot  be 
reduced  to  any  of  the  above-named  classes,  but  enough  has 
been  said  to  afford  the  student  some  general  notion  of  the 
nature  and  extent  of  the  subject." 

As  early  as  the  third  century  attempts  were  made  to  restore 
the  text  to  its  original  purity.  It  was  thought  that  by  critical 
collation  of  the  best  manuscripts,  and  by  selecting  the  best 
readings,  a  correct  exemplar  might  be  had  as  a  fount  for 
correct  copies.  Hesychius,  an  Egyptian  bishop,  martyred 
under  Diocletian,  wrought  a  recension  of  the  Greek  text  of 
both  Testaments.  The  text  was  adopted  in  the  churches  of 
Egypt,  and  became  the  basis  of  the  Alexandrine  family  of 
codices.  About  the  same  time,  Lucian,  a  priest  of  Antioch, 
martyred  in  the  same  persecution,  executed  a  recension  of  the 
text  of  both  Testaments,  which  was  received  in  all  the  Eastern 
churches,  from  Constantinople  to  Antioch.  Of  the  nature  of 
the  labors  of  Hesychius  and  Lucian  we  can  form  no  secure 
judgment.  Jerome  accuses  them  of  adding  to  the  Scriptures 
(Ad.  Dam.  Praef.  in  Evang.),  and  Gelasius,  in  the  decree,  De 
Recip.  et  non  recip.  Libris,  rejects  "  the  Gospels  which  Hesy- 
chius and  Lucian  falsified." 

Hug  believes  that  Origen  made  a  recension  of  the 
New  Testament,  but  it  is  far  more  probable  that  he  did 
not. 


428     THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

In  the  fourth  century  certain  causes  conspired  to  bring 
about  more  uniformity  in  the  texts  of  the  New  Testament. 
In  the  first  place,  critical  thought  had  been  aroused,  and 
transcribers  were  more  careful. 

Secondly,  "copies  of  Scripture  had  been  extensively  destroyed 
during  the  long  and  terrible  period  of  affliction  that  preceded  the 
conversion  of  Constantine.  In  the  very  edict  which  marked  the 
beginning  of  Diocletian's  persecution,  it  is  ordered  that  the 
holy  writings  should  be  burnt  {Ta<i  ypa(f)a<;  a^avel'^  Trvpl 
yeveaOai,  Eusebius,  £ccl.  Hist.  VIII.  2) ;  and  the  cruel  decree 
was  so  rigidly  enforced  that  a  special  name  of  reproach  {trad- 
itores)  together  with  the  heaviest  censures  of  the  Church,  was 
laid  upon  those  Christians  who  betrayed  the  sacred  trust.  At 
such  a  period  critical  revision  or  even  the  ordinary  care  of 
devout  transcribers  must  have  disappeared  before  the  pressure 
of  the  times  ;  fresh  copies  of  the  New  Testament  would  have 
to  be  made  in  haste  to  supply  the  room  of  those  seized  by  the 
enemies  of  our  Faith ;  and  when  made,  they  were  to  circulate 
by  stealth  among  persons  whose  lives  were  in  jeopardy  every 
hour.  Hence  arose  the  need,  when  the  tempest  was  overpast, 
of  transcribing  many  new  manuscripts  of  the  New  Testament, 
the  rather  as  the  Church  was  now  receiving  vast  accessions  of 
converts  within  her  pale.  Eusebius  of  Caesarea,  the  Ecclesias- 
tical Historian,  seems  to  have  taken  the  lead  in  this  happy 
labor ;  his  extensive  learning,  which  by  the  aid  of  certain  other 
less  commendable  qualities  had  placed  him  high  in  Constan- 
tine's  favor,  rendered  it  natural  that  the  Emperor  should  em- 
ploy his  services  for  furnishing  with  fifty  copies  of  Scripture 
the  Churches  of  his  new  capital,  Constantinople.  Eusebius' 
deep  interest  in  Biblical  studies  is  exhibited  in  several  of  his 
surviving  works,  as  well  as  in  his  Canons  for  harmonising  the 
Gospels ;  and  he  would  naturally  betake  himself  for  the  text 
of  his  fifty  codices  to  the  Library  founded  at  his  Episcopal 
city  of  Caesarea  by  the  martyr  Pamphilus,  the  dear  friend  from 
whom  he  derived  his  own  familiar  appelation  Eusebius  Patn- 
phili.  Into  this  Library  Pamphilus  had  gathered  manuscripts 
of  Origen  as  well  as  of  other  theologians,  of  which  Eusebius 
made  an  index  {jov^  irivaKa'i  Trapedefjbrjv :  Eccles.  Hist.  VI.  32); 
from  this  collection  Cod.  H  of  St.  Paul  and  others  are  stated 
to  have  been  derived,  nay  even  Cod.  i<5  in  its  Old  Testament 
portion,  which  is  expressly  declared  to  have  been  corrected  to 
the  Hexapla  of  Origen." 

"  We  are  thus  warranted,  as  well  from  direct  evidence  as 
from   the   analogy   of    the   Old   Testament,   to   believe   that 


THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  429 

Eusebius  mainly  resorted  for  his  Constantinopolitan  Church- 
books  to  the  codices  of  Pamphilus,  which  might  once  have  be- 
longed to  Origen.  What  critical  corrections  (if  any)  he  ven- 
tured to  make  in  the  text  on  his  own  judgment,  is  not  so  clear." 
In  the  last  century  arose  what  may  properly  be  called  the 
science  of  Comparative  Criticism,  which  may  be  defined  as 

A  METHOD  OF  STUDY  WHEREBY  WE  SEEK  TO  DETERMINE  THE 
character,  value,  AND  MUTUAL  RELATION  OF  THE  AUTHOR- 
ITIES  UPON   WHICH   THE   TEXT   OF  THE   NEW  TESTAMENT  IS 

BASED.  The  mode  of  procedure  is  to  examine  first  the  age  of 
the  documents,  the  circumstances  of  their  origin,  the  causes 
that  may  have  produced  certain  readings,  and  the  accord  of 
one  document  with  another. 

Among  the  first  promoters  of  this  new  science  was  John 
Mill,  of  Oxford.  Mill  spent  thirty  years  on  a  critical  edition 
of  the  Greek  Testament,  and  died  in  1707,  a  fortnight  after  its 
publication. 

"  A  large  proportion  of  his  care  and  pains,  as  we  have  seen, 
was  bestowed  on  the  Fathers  and  ancient  writers  of  every  de- 
scription who  have  used  and  cited  Scripture.  The  versions 
are  usually  considered  his  weakest  point ;  although  he  first 
accorded  to  the  Vulgate — and  its  prototype  the  Old  Latin — the 
importance  they  deserve.  His  knowledge  of  Syriac  was  rather 
slight,  and  for  the  other  Eastern  tongues,  if  he  was  not  more 
ignorant  than  his  successors,  he  had  not  discovered  how  little 
Latin  translations  of  the  ^thiopic  &c.  can  be  trusted." 

Mill's  work  was  truly  monumental.  Over  thirty  thousand 
different  readings  were  collected  in  his  Apparatus  Criticus. 
But  his  judgment  was  at  times  defective,  and  his  opinions 
inaccurate. 

In  England,  Walton  and  Fell  also  contributed  to  the  com- 
parative criticism  of  the  New  Testament. 

John  Albert  Bengel  (1687-1752),  the  Lutheran  Abbot  of 
Alpirspach,  gave  a  new  impetus  to  the  science  by  his  system 

of   RECENSIONS. 

"  An  attentive  student  of  the  discrepant  readings  of  the 
N.  T.,  even  in  the  limited  extent  they  had  hitherto  been  col- 
lected, could  hardly  fail  to  discern  that  certain  manuscripts, 
versions,  and  ecclesiastical  writers,  bear  a  certain  affinity  with 
each  other;  so  that  one  of  them  shall  seldom  be  cited  in  sup- 
port of  a  variation  (not  being  a  manifest  and  gross  error  of  the 
copyist),  unless  accompanied  by  several  of  its  kindred.  The 
inference  is  direct  and  clear,  that  documents  which  thus  with- 
draw themselves  from  the  general  mass  of  authorities,  must 


430  THE   GREEK  TEXT   OF  THE   NEW   TESTAMENT. 

have  sprung  from  some  common  source,  distinct  from  those, 
which  in  characteristic  readings  they  but  seldom  resemble.  It 
occurred,  therefore,  to  Bengel  as  a  hopeful  mode  of  making 
good  progress  in  the  criticism  of  the  N,  T.,  to  reduce  all  extant 
testimony  into  "  companies,  families,  tribes,  and  nations,"  and 
thus  to  simplify  the  process  of  settling  the  sacred  text  by 
setting  class  over  against  class,  and  trying  to  estimate  the 
genius  of  each,  and  the  relative  importance  they  may  severally 
lay  claim  to.  He  wishes  to  divide  all  extant  documents  into 
two  nations :  the  Asiatic,  chiefly  written  in  Constantinople  and 
its  neighborhood,  which  he  was  inclined  to  disparage ;  and 
the  African,  comprising  the  few  of  a  better  type  {Apparatus 
Criticus,  p.  669,  2nd  edition,  1763).  Various  circumstances 
hindered  Bengel  from  working  out  his  principle,  among  which 
he  condescends  to  set  his  dread  of  exposing  his  task  to  sense- 
less ridicule ;  yet  no  one  can  doubt  that  it  comprehends  the 
elements  of  what  is  both  reasonable  and  true ;  however  difficult 
it  has  subsequently  proved  to  adjust  the  details  of  any 
consistent  scheme.  For  the  rest,  Bengel's  critical  verdicts, 
always  considered  in  relation  to  his  age  and  opportunities,  de- 
serve strong  commendation.  He  saw  the  paramount  worth  of 
Cod.  A,  the  only  great  uncial  then  much  known  {N.  T.  Ap- 
parat.  Crit.  pp.  390-401) ;  and  the  high  character  of  the  Latin 
version." 

"  The  next  step  in  advance  was  made  by  John  James  Wet- 
stein  [1693-1754],  a  native  of  Basle,  whose  edition  of  the  Greek 
New  Testament  ("cum  lectionibus  Variantibus  Codicum  MSS., 
Editionum  aliarum,Versionum  et  Patrum,  necnon  Commentario 
pleniore  ex  Scriptoribus  veteribus,  Hebraeis,  Graecis  et 
Latinis,  historiam  et  vim  verborum  illustrante  ")  appeared  in 
two  volumes  folio,  Amsterdam,  175 1-2.  The  genius,  the 
character,  and  (it  must  in  justice  be  added)  the  worldly  fortunes 
of  Wetstein  were  widely  different  from  those  of  the 
Abbott  of  Alpirspach.  His  taste  for  Biblical  studies  showed 
itself  early.  When  ordained  pastor  at  the  age  of  twenty,  he 
delivered  a  disputation,  *'  De  variis  N.  T.  Lectionibus,"  and 
zeal  for  this  fascinating  pursuit  became  at  length  with  him  a 
pa.ssion ;  the  master-passion  which  consoled  and  dignified  a 
roving,  troubled,  unprosperous  life.  In  17 14,  his  eager  search 
for  manuscripts  led  him  to  Paris.  In  1715-6  and  again  in  1720, 
he  visited  England,  and  was  employed  by  Bentley  in  collect- 
ing materials  for  his  projected  edition,  but  he  seems  to  have 
imbibed  few  of  that  great  man's  principles :  the  interval  be- 
tween them,  both  in  age  and  station,  almost  forbade  much  sym- 


THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  431 

pathy.  On  his  return  home  he  gradually  became  suspected  of 
Socinian  tendencies,  and  it  must  be  feared  with  too  much 
justice  ;  so  that  in  the  end  he  was  deposed  from  the  pastorate 
(1730),  driven  into  exile,  and  after  having  been  compelled  to 
serve  in  a  position  the  least  favorable  to  the  cultivation  of 
learning,  that  of  a  military  chaplain,  he  obtained  at  length 
(1733)  a  Professorship  among  the  Remonstrants  at  Amsterdam 
(in  succession  to  the  celebrated  Leclerc),  and  there  continued 
till  his  death  in  1754,  having  made  his  third  visit  to  England 
in  1746.  His  Prolegomena,  first  published  in  1730,  and  after- 
wards, in  an  altered  form,  prefixed  to  his  N.T.,  present  a  pain- 
ful image  both  of  the  man  and  his  circumstances.  His  restless 
energy,  his  undaunted  industry,  his  violent  temper,  his  love  of 
paradox,  his  assertion  for  himself  of  perfect  freedom  of  thought, 
his  silly  prejudice  against  Jesuits  and  bigots,  his  enmities,  his 
wrongs,  his  ill-requited  labours,  at  once  excite  our  respect  and 
our  pity ;  while  they  all  help  to  make  his  writings  a  sort  of 
unconscious  biography,  rather  interesting  than  agreeable. 
Non  sic  itur  ad  astra,  whether  morally  or  intellectually ;  yet 
Wetstein's  services  to  sacred  literature  were  of  no  common 
order.  His  Philological  annotations,  wherein  the  matter  and 
phraseology  of  the  inspired  writers  are  illustrated  by  copious — 
too  copious — quotations  from  all  kinds  of  authors,  classical, 
Patristric  or  Rabbinical,  have  proved  an  inexhaustible  store- 
house from  which  later  writers  have  drawn  liberally  and  some- 
times without  due  acknowledgement ;  but  many  of  the  pas- 
sages are  of  such  a  tenor  as  (to  use  Tregelles'  very  gentle 
language  respecting  them)  "  only  excite  surprise  at  their  being 
found  on  the  same  page  as  the  text  of  the  New  Testament." 
The  critical  portion  of  his  work,  however,  is  far  more  valuable, 
and  in  this  department  Wetstein  must  be  placed  in  the  very 
first  rank,  inferior  (if  to  any)  but  to  one  or  two  of  the  highest 
names.  He  first  cited  the  manuscripts  under  the  notation  by 
which  they  are  commonly  known."    (Scrivener  op.  cit.). 

The  next  great  name  which  appears  in  the  history  of  our 
science  is  John  James  Griesbach  (1745-1812).  He  was  a  native  of 
Hesse-Darmstadt,  and  a  disciple  of  Semler  and  Ernesti.  His 
first  edition  of  the  New  Testament  appeared  in  1775,  and  was 
an  embryo  of  his  subsequent  great  work.  His  second  edition 
of  the  Greek  Testament,  in  two  volumes,  appeared  between 
the  years  1796  and  1806. 

"  At  the  onset  of  his  labours,  indeed,  this  acute,  and  candid 
enquirer  was  disposed  to  divide  all  extant  materials  into  five 
or  six  different  families  ;  he  afterwards  limited  them  to  three, 


432     THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

the  Alexandrine,  the  Western,  and  the  Byzantine  recensions. 
The  standard  of  the  Alexandrine  text  he  conceived  to  be 
Origen  ;  who,  although  his  works  were  written  in  Palestine, 
was  assumed  to  have  brought  with  him  into  exile  copies  of 
Scripture,  similar  to  those  used  in  his  native  city.  To  this 
family  would  belong  a  few  manuscripts  of  the  earliest  date, 
and  confessedly  of  the  highest  character,  Codd.  A,  B,  C  ;  Cod.  L 
of  the  Gospels,  the  Egyptian  and  some  lesser  versions.  The 
Western  recension  would  survive  in  Cod,  D  of  the  Gospels  and 
Acts,  in  the  other  ancient  copies  which  contained  a  Latin 
translation,  in  the  Old  Latin  and  Vulgate  versions,  and  in  the 
Latin  Fathers.  The  vast  majority  of  manuscripts  (comprising 
perhaps  nineteen-twentieths  of  the  whole),  together  with  the 
larger  proportion  of  versions  and  Patristic  writings,  were 
grouped  into  the  Byzantine  class,  as  having  prevailed  generally 
in  the  Patriarchate  of  Constantinople.  To  this  last  class 
Griesbach  hardly  professed  to  accord  as  much  weight  as  to 
either  of  the  others,  nor  if  he  had  done  so,  would  the  result 
have  been  materially  different.  The  joint  testimony  of  two 
classes  was,  caeteris  paribus,  always  to  prevail ;  and  since  the 
very  few  documents  which  comprise  the  Alexandrine  and 
Western  recensions  seldom  agree  with  the  Byzantine,  even 
when  at  variance  with  each  other,  the  numerous  codices  which 
make  up  the  third  family  would  thus  have  about  as  much  share 
in  fixing  the  text  of  Scripture,  as  the  poor  citizens  whose  host 
was  included  in  one  of  Servius  Tullius'  lower  classes  towards 
counterbalancing  the  votes  of  the  wealthy  few  that  composed 
his  first  or  second." 

The  labors  of  Matthaei  (1744-181 1)  are  of  slight  importance 
in  fixing  the  text. 

John  David  Michaelis  (1717-1719)  rejected  all  the  theories 
of  Griesbach  with  cont«ftipt.  He  declared  that  Griesbach  had 
never  seen  a  codex,  even  of  the  tenth  century,  and  he  loaded 
with  contempt  his  recensions  theory. 

According  to  Michaelis,  there  have  existed  four  principal 
recensions,  viz.,  i. — The  Alexandrine;  2. — The  Occidental ;  and, 
3. — The  Byzantine  as  proposed  by  Griesbach  ;  in  addition  to 
which,  as  the  old  Syriac  version  differs  from  them,  Michaelis 
has  instituted  a  fourth,  which  he  terms  the  Edessan  Edi- 
tion :  it  comprehends  the  special  Asiatic  instruments,  as  they 
were  termed  by  Griesbach,  or  those  Manuscripts  from  which 
that  Version  was  made.  Of  this  edition  no  manuscripts  are 
extant ;  a  circumstance  for  which  Michaelis  accounts,  by  the 
early  prejudice  of  the  Syrian  literati  in  favor  of  whatever  was 


THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.     433 

Grecian,  and  also  by  the  wars  that  devastated  the  East  for 
many  ages  subsequent  to  the  fifth  century.  But,  by  some 
accident,  which  is  difficult  to  be  explained,  manuscripts  are 
found  in  the  west  of  Europe,  accompanied  even  with  a  Latin 
translation,  such  as  the  Codex  Bezse,  which  so  eminently  coin- 
cide with  the  Old  Syriac  Version,  that  their  affinity  is  indis- 
putable. Although,  according  to  this  theory,  the  readings  of 
the  Occidental,  Alexandrine,  and  Edessan  editions  sometimes 
differ,  yet  they  very  frequently  harmonize  with  each  other. 
This  coincidence,  Michaelis  ascribes  to  their  high  antiquity,  as 
the  oldest  manuscripts  extant  belong  to  one  of  these  editions, 
and  the  translations  themselves  are  ancient.  A  reading  con- 
firmed by  three  of  them  is  supposed  to  be  of  the  very  highest 
authority ;  yet  the  true  reading  may  sometimes  be  found  only 
in  the  fourth. — (Home  op.  cit.) 

"But  a  system  was  devised  by  Professor  J.  L.  Hug  of 
Freyburg  in  1808  {einleitung),  and  maintained,  though  with 
some  modifications,  by  J.  F.  Eichorn,  which  gave  him  a  fore- 
most place  in  the  criticism  of  the  N.  T.  Hug  conceived  that 
the  process  of  corruption  had  been  going  on  so  rapidly  and 
uniformly  from  the  Apostolic  age  downwards,  that  by  the 
middle  of  the  third  century  the  state  of  the  text  in  the  gen- 
eral mass  of  codices  had  degenerated  into  the  form  exhibited 
in  Codd.  D.  i.  13.  69.  124  of  the  Gospels,  the  Old  Latin  and 
Thebaic  (he  would  now  have  added  the  Curetonian  Syriac) 
versions,  and  to  some  extent  in  the  Peshito  and  in  the  citations 
of  Clement  of  Alexandria,  and  of  Origen  in  his  early  works. 
To  this  uncorrected  text  he  gave  the  name  of  kolvt]  e/cSocrt?.)" 

"This  'common  edition'  Hug  supposes  to  have  received 
three  separate  emendations  in  the  middle  of  the  third  century  ; 
one  by  Origen  in  Palestine,  which  he  thinks  Jerome  adopted 
and  approved  ;  two  others  by  Hesychius  and  Lucian  (a  pres- 
byter of  Antioch  and  Martyr),  in  Egypt  and  Syria  respectively, 
both  which  Jerome  condemned,  and  Pope  Gelasius  (492-6)  de- 
clared to  be  apocryphal.  To  Origen's  recension  he  referred 
such  copies  as  A,  K,  M,  42.  106.  114.  116.  253  of  the  Gospels, 
the  Philoxenian  Syriac,  the  quotations  of  Chrysostom  and 
Theodoret ;  to  Hesychius  the  Alexandrine  codices  B,  C,  L  ;  to 
Lucian,  the  Byzantine  documents  E,  F,  G,  H,  S,  V,  and  the  mass 
of  later  books.  The  practical  effect  of  this  elaborate  theory 
would  be  to  accord  to  Cod.  A  a  higher  place  among  our 
authorities  than  some  recent  editors  have  granted  it ;  its  cor- 
respondence with  Origen  in  many  characteristic  readings  would 
thus  be  admitted  and  accounted  for." 

BB 


434    THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

"The  next  and  most  important  (as  it  is  the  most  probable), 
of  the  various  systems  of  recensions,  which  have  been  propos- 
ed, is  that  announced  by  Dr.  J.  Martin  Augustin  Scholz,  one 
of  the  professors  at  Bonn  upon  the  Rhine.  From  the  differ- 
ences, which  are  sufficiently  perceptible  in  the  manuscripts  and 
editions  of  the  Greek  text  of  the  New  Testament,  Dr.  Scholz 
concludes  that  these  instruments  naturally  divide  themselves 
into  two  great  classes,  which  are  the  same  throughout  the 
books  of  the  New  Testament.  To  the  first  of  these  classes 
belong  all  the  editions  and  those  numerous  manuscripts,  which 
were  written  within  the  limits  of  the  patriarchate  of  Constan- 
tinople, that  is,  in  Asia  or  in  the  eastern  parts  of  Europe,  and 
which  were  destined  for  liturgical  use  ;  the  second  class  com- 
prises certain  manuscripts  written  in  Egypt,  and  the  western 
part  of  Europe.  Transcribed,  unquestionably,  from  copies 
which  were  valuable  on  account  of  their  age  and  beauty,  they 
were  intended  only  to  preserve  the  contents  of  those  copies  ; 
but,  as  they  presented  a  different  text  from  that  which  was 
generally  received,  they  could  not  be  employed  in  divine  ser- 
vice :  hence  they  were  for  the  most  part  negligently  written, 
with  an  incorrect  orthography,  and  on  leaves  of  vellum  of  differ- 
ent sizes  and  qualities.  To  this  class,  Professor  Scholz  gives 
the  appellation  of  Alexandrine,  because  its  text  originated  at 
Alexandria ;  it  is  followed  by  several  Latin  and  Coptic  ver- 
sions, by  the  Ethiopic  version,  and  by  the  ecclesiastical  writers 
who  lived  in  Egypt  and  in  the  west  of  Europe.  The  other 
class  he  terms  the  Constantinopolitan,  because  its  text  was 
written  within  the  precincts  of  the  patriarchate  of  Constanti- 
nople ;  to  this  class  Dr.  Scholz  refers  the  Syriac  versions 
(Peschito  and  Philoxenian),  the  Gothic,  Georgian,  and  Slavonic 
versions,  and  the  quotations  from  the  New  Testament  which 
occur  in  the  works  of  the  ecclesiastical  writers,  who  flourished 
in  Asia  Minor,  Syria,  Palestine,  and  the  eastern  part  of 
Europe,  especially  Greece  and  Constantinople.  There  are, 
moreover,  extant  other  manuscripts,  which  belong  sometimes 
to  one  class,  and  sometimes  to  the  other,  and  which  also  ex- 
hibit some  peculiar  varieties ;  but,  after  repeated  examinations 
of  them,  he  is  of  opinion  that  they  do  not  possess  sufficient 
characters  to  constitute  them  distinct  classes.  The  conclusion 
to  which  Dr.  Scholz  has  arrived,  is,  that  the  Constantinopolitan 
text  is  almost  always  faithful  to  the  text  now  actually  re- 
ceived, while  the  Alexandrine  text  varies  from  it  in 
innumerable  instances ;  and  this  conclusion  he  founds, 
not    only    upon    the    actual    collation    of    six  hundred  and 


THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.  435 

seventy-four   manuscripts,  but   also    upon    an    induction    of 
historical  particulars,  of  which  the  following  is  an  abstract. 

The  separation  of  the  MSS.  of  the  New  Testament  into  two 
classes,  in  the  manner  just  stated  (Dr.  Scholz  argues),  is  so  con- 
formable to  the  real  state  of  the  text,  that  it  is  secure  from 
every  attack :  there  would,  indeed,  be  very  little  ground  for 
the  objection,  in  order  to  combat  this  classification,  that  the 
text  of  the  greatest  number  of  manuscripts  is  not  yet  known, 
and  consequently  uncertain.  This  objection  can  only  be 
repeUed  a  posteriori.  For  this  purpose,  after  having  deter- 
mined the  text  of  a  great  number  of  manuscripts  by  actually 
collating  a  few  chapters.  Dr.  Scholz  proceeded  to  collate  them 
nearly  at  length.  When,  therefore,  eighty  manuscripts  ex- 
hibited, almost  constantly,  the  same  additions,  the  same 
omissions,  and  the  same  various  readings,  with  the  exception 
of  a  few  obvious  mistakes  of  the  transcribers  and  some  un- 
important modifications  ; — when,  further,  after  taking  here  and 
there  fifteen  or  twenty  chapters,  he  uniformly  found  in  three 
or  four  hundred  other  manuscripts  the  same  various  readings 
as  in  the  first  eighty  ; — he  considered  himself  authorized  to 
conclude,  that  the  remainder  of  the  uncollated  manuscripts 
would  present  the  same  results  as  in  these  fifteen  or  twenty 
chapters ;  and  that  like  results  would  be  presented  by  all  the 
manuscripts  written  in  the  same  place  and  under  the  same 
circumstances  as  these  four  hundred  manuscripts  were  written  ; 
that  is  to  say,  that  all  the  manuscripts  which  were  written 
within  the  patriarchate  of  Constantinople,  and  were  destined 
to  be  used  in  divine  service,  followed  the  text  of  the  Constan- 
tinopolitan  class. 

It  is  by  no  means  surprising  that  this  classification  should 
be  thus  clearly  connected  with  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction.  The 
history  of  the  propagation  of  Christianity  shows  us  with  what 
strictness,  especially  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  patriarch  of 
Constantinople,  missionaries  enjoined  on  their  converts  the 
minutest  rites  of  the  principal  church,  and  also  to  what  warm 
disputes  the  least  deviation  from  them  gave  rise.  These  dis- 
cussions always  terminated  in  reducing  them  to  the  most 
entire  conformity  with  the  metropolis. 

Further,  from  the  fifth  to  the  middle  of  the  fifteenth  cen- 
tury, a  greater  number  of  copies  of  the  sacred  books  was  made 
at  Constantinople  than  in  all  the  rest  of  the  patriarchate. 
Transcribed  and  collated  in  the  same  convents  under  the  eyes 
of  the  superiors,  then  sent  forth  by  the  monks  and  priests 
to  distant  churches,  all  these  copies  presented  the  same  text, 


436     THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

as  well  as  the  same  characters  and  the  same  menologies 
(or  calendars  of  saints  for  every  day  in  the  month 
throughout  the  year),  in  all  the  provinces  which  were 
subject  to  the  influence  of  the  metropolitan  church,  and  of 
of  its  literature. 

When  Islamism  was  diffused  from  India  to  the  Atlantic 
Ocean  ; — when  thousands  of  Christians  were  imprisoned, 
driven  to  apostasy,  or  sold  as  slaves ; — when  the  flames  had 
devoured  a  prodigious  number  of  Greek  manuscripts ;  when 
the  use  of  the  Greek  language  was  interdicted  and  the  capital 
of  Greek  literature  was  overthrown, — then  the  influence  of 
Constantinople  extended,  without  a  rival,  over  almost  every- 
thing that  remained  to  the  Christians  who  spoke  Greek.  The 
text  of  the  Constantinopolitan  church,  and  the  manuscripts 
which  contained  it,  were  generally  adopted.  The  text  of  the 
other  class,  on  the  contrary,  which  had  till  then  been  used  for 
divine  service  within  the  limits  of  the  patriarchate  of  Alexan- 
dria, and  the  manuscripts  belonging  to  that  class,  disappeared 
almost  entirely.  The  copyists  ceased  to  transcribe  them  :  the 
most  ancient  and  valuable  perished  ;  and  their  text  was  pre- 
served only  in  a  few  libraries,  or,  by  a  few  lovers  of  literature, 
as  curiosities,  or  as  venerable  relics  of  ancient  and  lost  docu- 
ments. 

Although  the  Alexandrine  text  is  sometimes  found  in 
liturgical  books  or  in  lectionaries.  Dr.  Scholz  cannot  believe 
that  the  manuscripts,  which  contained  it,  were  ever  destined 
for  divine  service  ;  they  have,  in  fact,  been  written  with  so 
much  haste  and  incorrectness,  that  such  could  never  have  been 
their  destination.  The  manuscripts  of  both  families  ordinarily 
have  few  corrections  and  no  various  readings  in  the  margins  : 
every  thing,  on  the  contrary,  indicates  that  they  are  not  exact 
copies  of  ancient  exemplars. 

That  so  few  very  ancient  manuscripts  of  the  Constantino- 
politan text  are  now  extant,  is  a  circumstance  which  ought  not 
to  excite  surprise.  They  must  necessarily  have  been  worn  out, 
and  have  perished,  in  consequence  of  the  daily  use  made  of 
them  for  divine  service.  In  the  fourth  century  the  text  may 
be  regarded  as  equally  fixed  with  the  Canon  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment ;  after  which  time  the  veneration  of  believers  for  the 
sacred  books  would  not  allow  the  introduction  of  any  change. 
Before  that  period,  therefore,  the  alterations  must  have  taken 
place,  which  gave  rise  to  the  division  of  manuscripts  into  two 
classes.  Since  that  period  manuscripts  have  been  collated  and 
even  corrected,  but  never  arbitrarily  and  always  after  ancient 


THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT.     437 

documents :  besides,  the  corrections  so  made  were  of  little  im- 
portance, and  had  only  a  limited  influence.  Although  different 
manuscripts  may  be  of  the  same  country,  it  does  not  neces- 
sarily result  that  their  text  exhibits  an  absolute  identity,  but 
only  a  general  conformity  in  the  greatest  number  of  cases. 

What  then,  it  may  be  asked,  was  the  origin  of  the  Constan- 
tinopolitan  text  ?  Dr.  Scholz  is  of  opinion  that  it  was  the 
original  text,  nearly  in  all  its  purity,  and  derived  directly  from 
autographs.  This  he  regards  as  certain  as  any  critical  fact  can 
be:  history  leads  us  to  admit  it ;  external  evidence  confirms  it; 
and  it  is  completely  demonstrated  by  internal  proofs. 

The  greater  part  of  the  writings  of  the  New  Testament 
were  destined  for  the  churches  in  Greece  and  in  Asia  Minor, 
where  the  idea  of  forming  a  collection  of  them  would  originate, 
as  is  evident  from  Saint  John's  approbation  of  the  collection  of 
the  three  first  Gospels.  These  writings  were,  from  the 
beginning,  read  in  the  religious  assemblies  of  the  Christians ; 
and  when  the  originals  were  worn  out  or  lost  by  use,  or  by  the 
calamities  which  befell  many  of  the  churches,  apographs  or 
correct  transcripts  from  them  were  preserved  in  private 
libraries  as  well  as  in  the  libraries  attached  to  the  churches. 
These  holy  writings  were  further  multiplied  by  numerous 
copyists  for  the  use  of  private  individuals.  In  transcribing  the 
text,  the  Constantinopolitan  scribes  certainly  did  not  imitate 
the  audacity  of  the  grammarians  of  Alexandria.  This  would 
be  in  the  highest  degree  improbable,  if  the  question  related  to 
profane  authors  ;  but  it  becomes  utterly  incredible  as  it  regards 
the  New  Testament.  On  the  contrary,  these  writings  were 
cherished  with  increasing  religious  veneration.  The  long  series 
of  venerable  bishops,  who  presided  over  the  numerous  churches 
in  Asia,  the  Archipelago,  and  in  Greece,  transmitted  to  the 
faithful  the  instructions  which  they  had  received  from  the 
Apostles.  Far  from  altering  in  any  degree  that  sacred  deposit, 
they  labored  with  pious  vigilance  to  preserve  it  pure  and  un- 
mutilated.  In  this  state  they  left  it  to  their  successors  and  to 
new  churches ;  and,  with  the  exception  of  a  few  errors  of  the 
copyists,  the  text  remained  without  alterations  until  the 
reigns  of  Constantine  and  of  Constans.  At  that  time,  how- 
ever, some  Alexandrine  MSS.  were  dispersed  at  Constanti- 
nople, whence  alterations  were  introduced  into  many  Byzan- 
tine manuscripts.  This  circumstance  accounts  for  a  tend- 
ency in  the  Constantinopolitan  family  to  approximate 
nearer  to  the  Alexandrine  text  than  we  should  otherwise 
expect. 


438  THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

Among  the  critics  of  the  present  century,  a  place  must  be 
given  to  Charles  Lachmann  (fiSsi).  His  critical  edition  of  the 
New  Testament,  in  Greek  and  Latin,  appeared  between  the 
years  1842  and  1850. 

"Lachmann  had  published  as  early  as  1831  a  small  edition 
containing  only  the  text  of  the  N.  T.,  with  a  list  of  the 
readings,  wherein  he  differs  from  that  of  Elzevir,  preceded  by 
a  notice  of  his  plan  not  exceeding  a  few  lines  in  length,  itself 
so  obscurely  worded  that  even  to  those  who  happened  to 
understand  his  meaning  it  must  have  read  like  a  riddle  whose 
solution  they  had  been  told  beforehand ;  and  referring  us  for 
fuller  information  to  what  he  strangely  considers  '  a  more  con- 
venient place,'  a  German  periodical  of  the  preceding  year's 
date.  Authors  who  take  so  little  pains  to  explain  their  funda- 
mental principles  of  criticism,  especially  if  (as  in  this  case) 
these  are  novel  and  unexpected,  can  hardly  wonder  when  their 
drift  and  purpose  are  imperfectly  apprehended ;  so  that  a  little 
volume,  which  we  now  learn  had  cost  Lachmann  five  years  of 
thought  and  labor,  was  confounded,  even  by  the  learned, 
with  the  common,  hasty  and  superficial  reprints.  Nor  was  the 
diflficulty  much  removed  on  the  publication  of  the  first  volume 
of  his  larger  book.  It  was  then  seen,  indeed,  how  clean  a 
sweep  he  had  made  of  the  great  mass  of  Greek  manuscripts 
usually  cited  in  critical  editions; — in  fact  he  rejected  all  in  a 
heap  excepting  Codd.  A,  B,  C,  the  fragments  P,  Q,  T,  Z,  (and  for 
some  purposes  D)  of  the  Gospels;  D,  E,  of  the  Acts  only; 
D,  G,  H,  of  St.  Paul; — he  treated  the  scheme  of  his  work 
as  if  it  were  already  familiarly  known,  and  spent  his  time  in 
discursive  controversy  with  his  opponents  and  reviewers, 
whom  he  chastised  with  a  heartiness,  which,  in  Eng- 
land, men  imputed  to  downright  malice,  till  Dr.  Tregelles 
was  so  good  as  to  instruct  them,  that  in  Lachmann,  it  was 
but  *a  tone  of  pleasantry,'  the  horseplay  of  coarse  Ger- 
man wit  {Account  of  Printed  Texty  p.  112).  The  sup- 
plementary Prolegomena  which  preface  his  second  volume 
of  1850  are  certainly  more  explicit;  both  from  what  they 
teach  and  from  the  practical  examples  they  contain,  they  have 
helped  to  gain  a  nearer  insight  into  his  whole  design." 

"  It  seems,  then,  to  have  been  Lachmann's  purpose,  dis- 
carding the  slightest  regard  for  the  textus  receptus  as  such,  to 
endeavor  to  bring  the  sacred  text  back  to  the  condition  in 
which  it  existed  during  the  fourth  century,  and  this  in  the 
first  instance  by  documentary  aid  alone,  careless  for  the 
moment  whether  the  sense  produced  be  probable  or  improb- 


THE   GREEK   TEXT   OF  THE   NEW   TESTAMENT.  439 

able,  good  or  bad ;  but  solely  looking  to  his  authorities,  and 
following  them  implicitly  wheresoever  the  numerical  majority 
might  carry  him.  For  accomplishing  this  purpose  he  possessed 
but  one  Greek  copy  written  as  early  as  the  fourth  century, 
Cod.  B ;  and  of  that  he  not  only  knew  less  than  has 
since  come  to  light,  but  he  did  not  avail  himsetlf  of 
Bartolocci's  papers,  to  which  Scholz  had  already  drawn 
attention.  His  other  codices  were  not  of  the  fourth  century 
at  all,  but  varying  in  date  from  the  fifth  (A,  C,  T,)  to  the  ninth 
(G) ;  and  even  of  these  few  (of  C  more  especially)  his  assistant 
or  colleague  Buttmann's  representation  was  loose,  careless,  and 
unsatisfactory.  Of  the  Greek  Fathers,  the  scanty  Greek  re- 
mains of  Irenaeus,  and  the  works  of  Origen  are  all  that  are  em- 
ployed ;  but  considerable  weight  is  given  to  the  readings  of  the 
Latin  version.  The  Vulgate  is  printed  at  length  as  revised, 
after  a  fashion,  by  Lachmann  himself,  from  the  codices 
Fuldensis  and  Amiatinus  ;  the  Old  Latin  manuscripts  <a:,  b,  c,  to- 
gether with  the  Latin  versions  accompanying  the  Greek  copies 
which  he  receives,  are  regarded  as  primary  authorities ;  of  the 
Western  Fathers  he  quotes  Cyprian,  Hilary  of  Poitiers,  Lucifer 
of  Cagliari,  and  in  the  Apocalypse  Primasius  also  {h).  The 
Syriac  and  Egyptian  translations  he  considers  himself  excused 
from  attending  to,  by  reason  of  his  ignorance  of  their  respective 
languages."     (Scrivener  op.  cit.) 

After  this  brief  notice  of  the  great  labors  of  these  eminent 
scholars,  we  judge  ourselves  incompetent  to  properly  estimate 
the  value  of  their  labors.  We  shall,  therefore,  adduce  the 
judgment  of  a  man  who,  by  his  genius  and  by  his  labors, 
merited  to  be  called  the  greatest  biblical  critic  of  his  age, 
Aenotheus  Fridericus  Constantinus  Tischendorf  (f  1874). 

Passing  over  his  early  studies,  we  find  him,  in  1841,  setting 
out  to  travel  in  the  cause  of  science,  so  poor  "  that  he  could 
not  pay  for  the  cloak  that  he  wore."  He  thrice  visited 
England,  and  thrice  visited  the  East,  and  during  one  of  these 
latter  journeys,  his  great  discovery  of  the  Codex  Sinaiticus  was 
made.  Besides  his  critical  editions  of  both  Old  and  New  Tes- 
taments, Tischendorf  stands  alone  in  having  given  to  the 
world  the  texts  of  the  great  Uncial  Codices.  His  critical 
edition  of  Codex  ^  is  the  greatest  work  of  this  kind  ever  seen 
in  the  history  of  the  text. 

Such  a  man  could  pass  judgment  on  the  labors  of  his  pre- 
decessors, and  his  judgment  is  that,  "instead  of  deriving  a  history 
of  the  text  from  documents,  they  had  created  a  history  of  the 
text  in  their  own  minds."     (Tischendorf  N.  T.  Graece,  ed.  7.) 


440     THE  GREEK  TEXT  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

He  reduces  all  the  codices  to  four  great  families,  i. — The 
Alexandrine,  used  by  the  Jewish  Christians.  2. — The  Latin 
family,  used  by  the  Latin  race,  who,  in  those  days,  used  Greek 
in  liturgy.  3. — The  Asiatic  family,  used  by  the  Greeks,  both 
in  Asia  and  their  own  country.  4. — The  Byzantine  family, 
used  by  the  Churches  of  the  Byzantine  realm.  He  stated  that 
there  is  great  affinity  between  the  Alexandrian  and  Latin  on 
one  side,  and  between  the  Asiatic  and  Byzantine  on  the  other. 
He  cautions  all  not  to  put  too  much  trust  in  the  systems  of 
recensions. 

Samuel  Prideaux  Tregelles  (fiS/S)  also  merits  a  place 
among  biblical  critics  for  his  critical  edition  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. 

In  our  own  days,  Westcott  and  Hort  have  devoted  over 
thirty  years  of  labor  to  the  collating  of  Manuscripts,  and 
have  merited  a  place  of  honor  among  biblical  critics.  They 
also  have  a  theory  of  four  families  of  codices  differing  from 
those  noticed,  but  enough  has  been  said  to  convince  the  reader 
that  whatever  is  to  be  done  to  restore  the  text  to  its  pristine 
purity,  must  be  done  without  the  aid  of  theories  of  recension. 

According  to  Scholz's  enumeration,  the  whole  number  of 
codices  of  the  New  Testament,  which  had  been  wholly  or 
partially  collated  up  to  his  time,  amounted  to  six  hundred  and 
seventy-four.  The  whole  number  known  up  to  the  present 
day  would  exceed  two  thousand.  Many  have  not  yet  been 
examined.  Only  a  small  number  of  these  contain  all  the 
books.  Some  exist  only  in  scattered  fragments ;  others  con- 
tain some  particular  book,  or  class  of  books.  About  one 
hundred  are  written  in  uncial  characters,  and  are  older  than 
the  tenth  century.  Of  these,  only  the  Codex  of  Sinai  contains 
the  complete  New  Testament.  The  others  are  written  in  small 
letters,  and  are  of  date  more  recent  than  the  tenth  century. 
About  three  hundred  of  these  contain  all  the  books.  The 
uncial  codices  receive  their  name  either  from  the  place  where 
they  are  preserved,  or  from  the  person  to  whom  they  have  be- 
longed. In  the  Apparatus  Criticus  they  are  designated  by 
capital  letters  of  the  Latin  and  Greek  alphabets,  while  the 
codices  minusculi  are  designated  by  the  Arabic  numerals.  One 
uncial  codex  is  designated  by  the  Hebrew  ^,  that  of  Mt.  Sinai. 
In  applying  these  conventional  signs,  the  New  Testament  is 
divided  into  four  parts,  viz :  the  Gospels,  the  Acts  and  Cath- 
olic Epistles,  the  Epistles  of  Paul,  and  the  Apocalypse,  so  that 
the  same  conventional  note  of  designation  may  signify  different 
codices,  as  it  is  applied  to  different  parts  of  the  Testament. 


THE   UNCIAL   CODICES.  441 

For  example,  Codex  D  of  Paul's  Epistles,  is  the  codex  of 
Clermont,  while  Codex  D  of  the  Gospels,  is  Beza's  codex  at 
Cambridge. 

"  In  using  manuscripts  of  the  Greek  Testament,  we  must 
carefully  note  whether  a  reading  \s  prima  manu  or  by  some 
subsequent  corrector.  It  will  often  happen  that  these  last  are 
utterly  valueless,  having  been  inserted  even  from  printed 
copies  by  a  modern  owner  (like  some  marginal  variations  of 
the  Cod.  Leicestrensis),  and  such  as  these  really  ought  not  to 
have  been  extracted  by  collators  at  all ;  while  others  by  the 
second  hand  are  almost  as  weighty,  for  age  and  goodness,  as 
the  text  itself.  AW  these  points  are  explained  by  critical 
editors  for  each  document  separately."     (Scrivener  op.  cit.) 

To  indicate  these  additions  a  small  character,  like  the  ex- 
ponent of  a  power  in  algebra,  is  placed  at  the  right  upper  corner 
of  the  main  sign  of  the  codex,  thus  Cod.  B"^  would  indicate 
an  addition  to  the  Vatican  Codex  by  a  third  hand. 

To  determine  the  age  of  the  old  codices,  we  must  have 
recourse  to  the  criteria  palaeographica,  principal  of  which  are 
the  material  of  the  manuscript,  the  form  of  the  letters,  the 
signs  of  punctuation,  the  accents,  and  the  abbreviations  em- 
ployed. 

These  means  do  not  lead  to  mathematical  certitude,  but 
they  furnish  a  high  degree  of  probability  of  the  century  to 
which  the  manuscript  should  be  referred. 

We  have  no  codices  older  than  the  fourth  century.  The 
destruction  wrought  by  the  decree  of  Diocletian  and  other 
causes  have  deprived  us  of  these.  Of  the  uncial  codices,  two 
are  referred  to  the  fourth  century,  ten  to  the  fifth  century, 
twenty-two  to  the  sixth  century,  nine  to  the  seventh  century, 
eight  to  the  eighth  century,  thirty-one  to  the  ninth  century, 
and  six  to  the  tenth  century.  In  the  judgment  of  Westcott 
and  Hort,  many  of  the  codices  here  placed  in  the  preceding 
centuries  must  be  brought  down  to  the  ninth  and  tenth 
centuries. 

Chapter  XIX. 

Some  Account  of  the  Uncial  Codices. 

By  uncial  codices  we  mean  those  manuscripts  written  in 
large  characters  of  nearly  uniform  size,  resembling  modern 
capitals,  but  with  greater  roundness.  The  plate  of  the  Codex 
Claromontanus  opposite  page  460,  furnishes  a  good  example 
of  this  mode  of  writing. 


442  THE   UNCIAL   CODICES. 

"  The  Greek  manuscripts,  which  have  descended  to  our 
time,  are  written  either  on  vellum  or  on  paper ;  and  their 
external  form  and  condition  vary,  like  the  manuscripts  of  other 
ancient  authors.  The  vellum  is  either  purple-colored  or  of  its 
natural  hue,  and  is  either  thick  or  thin.  Manuscripts  on  very 
thin  vellum  were  always  held  in  the  highest  esteem.  The 
paper,  also,  is  either  made  of  cotton,  or  the  common  sort 
manufactured  from  linen,  and  is  either  glazed,  or  laid  (as  it  is 
technically  termed),  that  is,  of  the  ordinary  roughness.  Not 
more  than  six  manuscript  fragments  on  purple  vellum  are 
known  to  be  extant ;  they  are  described  in  the  following 
sections  of  this  chapter.  The  Codex  Claromontanus,  of  which 
a  brief  notice  is  also  given  in  a  subsequent  page,  is  written  on 
very  thin  vellum.  All  manuscripts  on  paper  are  of  a  much  later 
date ;  those  on  cotton  paper  being  posterior  to  the  ninth  cen- 
tury, and  those  on  linen  subsequent  to  the  twelfth  century ; 
and  if  the  paper  be  of  very  ordinary  quality,  Wetstein  pro- 
nounces them  to  have  been  written  in  Italy,  in  the  fifteenth 
and  sixteenth  centuries. 

"  The  letters  are  either  capital  (which  in  the  time  of 
Jerome  were  called  uncial,  or  cursive,  i.  e.,  small ;  the 
capital  letters,  again,  are  of  two  kinds,  either  unadorned  and 
simple,  and  made  with  straight,  thin  strokes,  or  thicker,  uneven, 
and  angular.  Some  of  them  are  supported  on  a  sort  of  a  base, 
while  others  are  decorated,  or  rather  burdened,  with  various 
tops.  As  letters  of  the  first  kind  are  generally  seen  on  ancient 
Greek  monuments,  while  those  of  the  last  resemble  the  paint- 
ings of  semi-barbarous  times,  manuscripts  written  with  the 
former  are  generally  supposed  to  be  as  old  as  the  fifth  century, 
and  those  written  with  the  latter  are  supposed  to  be  posterior 
the  ninth  century. 

"All  manuscripts,  the  most  ancient  not  excepted,  have 
erasures  and  corrections ;  which,  however,  were  not  always 
effected  so  dexterously,  but  that  the  original  writing  may 
sometimes  be  seen.  Where  these  alterations  have  been  made 
by  the  copyist  of  the  manuscript,  {a  prima  manu,  as  it  is 
termed,)  they  are  preferable  to  those  made  by  later  hands,  or 
a  secunda  manu.  These  erasures  were  sometimes  made  by 
drawing  a  line  through  the  word,  or  what  is  tenfold  worse,  by 
the  penknife.  But,  besides  these  modes  of  obliteration,  the 
copyist  frequently  blotted  out  the  old  writing  with  a  sponge^ 
and  wrote  other  words  in  lieu  of  it ;  nor  was  this  practice  con- 
fined to  a  single  letter  or  word,  as  may  be  seen  in  the  Codex 
Bezae.     Authentic   instances   are   on   record   in   which  whole 


THE   UNCIAL  CODICES.  443 

books  have  been  thus  obliterated,  and  other  writing  has  been 
substituted  in  the  place  of  the  manuscript  so  blotted  out ;  but 
where  the  writing  was  already  faded  through  age,  they  pre- 
served their  transcriptions  without  further  erasure. 

"  These  manuscripts  are  termed  Codices  Palimpsesti  or 
Rescripti.  Before  the  invention  of  paper,  the  great  scarcity  of 
parchment  in  different  places  induced  many  persons  to  oblit- 
erate the  works  of  ancient  writers,  in  order  to  transcribe  their 
own,  or  those  of  some  other  favorite  author  in  their  place  ; 
hence,  doubtless,  the  works  of  many  eminent  writers  have 
perished,  and  particularly  those  of  the  greatest  antiquity ;  for 
such  as  were  comparatively  recent  were  transcribed  to  satisfy 
the  immediate  demand,  while  those  which  were  already  dim 
with  age  were  erased.  It  was  for  a  long  time  thought  that  this 
destructive  practice  was  confined  to  the  eleventh,  twelfth, 
thirteenth,  and  fourteenth  centuries,  and  that  it  chiefly  pre- 
vailed among  the  Greeks ;  but  this  destructive  operation  was 
likewise  practised  by  the  Latins,  and  is  also  of  a  more  remote 
date  than  has  usually  been  supposed. 

"  In  general,  a  Codex  Rescriptus  is  easily  known,  as  it 
rarely  happens  that  the  former  writing  is  so  completely  erased, 
as  not  to  exhibit  some  traces ;  in  a  few  instances,  both  writings 
are  legible.  Many  such  manuscripts  are  preserved  in  the 
library  of  the  British  Museum.  Montfaucon  found  a  manu- 
script in  the  Colbert  Library,  which  had  been  written  about 
the  eighth  century,  and  originally  contained  the  works  ascribed 
to  St.  Dionysius ;  new  matter  had  been  written  over  it,  three 
or  four  centuries  afterwards,  and  both  continued  legible.  Mu- 
ratori  saw  in  the  Ambrosian  Library  a  manuscript  comprising 
the  works  of  the  venerable  Bede,  the  writing  of  which  was  from 
eight  to  nine  hundred  years  old,  and  which  had  been  substi- 
tuted for  another  upwards  of  a  thousand  years  old.  Notwith- 
standing the  efforts  which  had  been  made  to  erase  the  latter, 
some  phrases  could  be  deciphered,  which  indicated  it  to  be  an 
ancient  pontifical.  The  indefatigable  researches  of  Cardinal 
Angelo  Mai'  (for  some  time  the  principal  keeper  of  the  Vatican 
Library  at  Rome)  have  discovered  several  valuable  remains  of 
biblical  and  classical  literature  in  the  Ambrosian  Library  at 
Milan." 

Among  all  the  codices  of  the  world,  four  stand  preeminent, 
and  of  these  the  CODEX  Vaticanus,  B  (1209),  is  the 
greatest. 

"CoDEX  Vaticanus  B,  1209,  is  one  of  the  oldest 
vellum  manuscripts  in  existence,  and  is  the  glory  of  the  great 


444  THE   UNCIAL   CODICES. 

Vatican  Library  at  Rome.  (See  plate  on  opposite  page.) 
This  book  seems  to  have  been  brought  into  the  Vatican 
Library  shortly  after  its  establishment  by  Pope  Nicholas  V.  who 
died  in  1455,  but  nothing  is  known  of  its  previous  history. 

"  The  Vatican  manuscript  is  written  on  parchment  or  vel- 
lum, in  uncial  or  capital  letters,  in  three  columns  on  each  page, 
all  of  which  are  of  the  same  size,  except  at  the  begining  of  a 
book.  It  is  without  any  divisions  of  chapters,  verses,  or  words, 
but  with  accents  and  spirits.  The  shape  of  the  letters,  and 
color  of  the  ink,  prove  that  it  was  written  throughout  by  one 
and  the  same  careful  copyist.  The  abbreviations  are  few, 
being  confined  chiefly  to  those  words  which  are  in  general 
abbreviated,  such  as  @C,  KC,  IC,  XC,  for  0eo9,  Kvpio<;,  lr]<7ov<i, 
'Kpiaro'i,  God,  Lord,  Jesus,  Christ.  Originally  this  manuscript 
contained  the  entire  Greek  Bible,  including  both  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments ;  in  which  respect  it  resembles  none  so  much 
as  the  Codex  Alexandrinus,  though  no  two  manuscripts  vary 
more  in  their  readings.  The  Old  Testament  wants  the  first 
forty-six  chapters  of  Genesis,  and  thirty-two  psalms,  viz.  from 
Psal.  CV.  to  CXXXVIL  inclusive;  and  the  New  Testament 
wants  the  latter  part  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  viz.  all 
after  Chapter  IX.  verse  14,  and  also  Saint  Paul's  other  epistles 
to  Timothy,  Titus,  and  Philemon,  and  the  whole  Book  of 
Revelation.  It  appears,  however,  that  this  last  book,  as  well 
as  the  latter  part  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  has  been  sup- 
plied by  a  modern  hand  in  the  fifteenth  century,  and,  it  is  said, 
from  some  manuscript  that  had  formerly  belonged  to  Cardinal 
Bessarion.  In  many  places  the  faded  letters  have  also  been 
retouched  by  a  modern  but  careful  hand  ;  and  when  the  person 
who  made  these  amendments  (whom  Michaelis  pronounces  to 
have  been  a  man  of  learning)  found  various  readings  in  other 
manuscripts,  he  has  introduced  them  into  the  Codex  Vaticanus, 
but  has  still  preserved  the  original  text ;  and  in  some  few 
instances  he  has  ventured  to  erase  with  a  penknife." 

All  who  have  inspected  the  Codex  are  loud  in  the  praises 
of  the  fine  thin  vellum,  the  clear  and  elegant  hand  of  the 
first  penman,  the  simplicity  of  the  whole  style  of  the  work ; 
capital  letters,  so  frequent  in  the  Codex  Alexandrinus,  were 
totally  wanting  in  this  document  for  several  centuries.  In 
several  of  these  particulars  our  manuscript  resembles  the 
Herculanean  rolls,  and  thus  asserts  a  just  claim  to  high 
antiquity,  which  the  absence  of  the  usual  divisions  into 
K€<j)d\aia,  of  Ammonian  sections  and  Canons  of  Eusebius,  and 
the  substitution  in  their  room  of  another  scheme  of  chapters 


THE   UNCIAL   CODICES.  445 


+         -f  "^ 


■r  B Av6£;oc>J ht  n p p c TO jM  eM 
p  i<*.i^7: AfMOA^oroc  oyToc 

nro  K"A.ixcD  p  V  c  A.-rp-;6  y  e  re ' 
>J  e TO  6  y  Ad  ^  m  hre  ro*j«~ 

2:aJHA^J^^o<:}>^I^c;K^lTQ      -twr**^»fv^r--». 

tcD  c  €  N  T  H  c/ica:«-;>V<4>Ai . 

M  €M  o^  n  A:f  i  e  y  oht  o  hAK 
Ayrua  iti^x^i  H  c  oy-roc 
j^Xe'e  V«4  e  I  c  M  XT  nry  >  J^ 
y  M>rfM  X  P  T:y  r  rt  <c?  w  n  e  p^j  ivy 
ci>  ODproc  I*  t^J  A  r  iXkT'^C  ni 
c  nre  y  ecu  c  I  r^  i^  i  xy  toy 
oy  kf  Ah  e'Ke  i  m  oc'r6<p*^» 

AA  Xl M>.M  ^f  TV r.H  C ^rn<^ 
p^r7^y<Ku>xpc  /fisiTP<f>J» 

TO  A-X  K  ©  C  I  M  O  M  6  cfc>  CU  -p^ 

72;€inXNi~i  ^A-taorobnOM 

j^  A  ro  KO  c  M  p  c  zs  i  .Ky  Toy 
€:  r€>J  €  "TO  KT  A^  1 9  Ko'c  M  oo 

TX Y  iw  I  >.  hi  A  ©e  M  K  X  I Q 1 1 /^ 

o?i  A  y  TO  M  p  y  ri  ^  f  e_^Ax  e  p 
cjoo^Ae  €  A><  K.XN  xyroN 
€  Acb»<€  r^  Xy  TO  ipe^oy 
o  f  AM  T^e  K-isfAe  y  re>4  e  c^i 
^nro I c  h  re Tne'y oy  ci  iM  ^^JC 

^Ke  T  <k^  wi  ><Tco>JoyA'ee*^ 
^  eA  hUM  aTO^jC;A>p^o1c^ 


446  THE   UNCIAL   CODICES. 

of  its  own,  beyond  question  tend  very  powerfully  to  confirm. 
Each  column  contains  about  forty-two  lines,  each  line  from 
sixteen  to  eighteen  letters,  of  a  size  somewhat  less  than  in  the 
Codex  Alexandrinus,  with  no  intervals  between  the  words,  a 
space  of  the  breadth  of  half  a  letter  being  left  at  the  end  of  a 
sentence,  and  a  little  more  at  the  conclusion  of  a  paragraph. 
It  has  been  doubted  whether  any  of  the  stops  zrQ  prima  manu, 
and  (contrary  to  the  judgment  of  Birch  and  others)  the  breath- 
ings and  accents  are  now  generally  allowed  to  have  been  added 
by  the  second  hand.  This  hand,  apparently  of  about  the 
eighth  century,  retraced,  with  as  much  care  as  such  an  opera- 
tion would  permit,  the  faint  lines  of  the  original  writing  (the 
ink  whereof  was  perhaps  never  quite  black),  the  remains  of 
which  can  even  now  be  seen  by  a  keen-sighted  reader  by  the 
side  of  the  more  modern  strokes ;  anxious  at  the  same  time  to 
represent  a  critical  revision  of  the  text,  the  writer  left  un- 
touched such  words  or  letters  as  he  wished  to  reject.  In  these 
places,  where  no  breathings  or  accents  and  scarcely  any  stops 
have  ever  been  detected,  we  have  an  opportunity  of  seeing  the 
manuscript  in  its  primitive  condition  ;  before  it  had  been  tam- 
pered with  by  the  later  scribe.  There  are  occasional  breaks  in 
the  continuity  of  the  writing,  every  descent  in  the  genealogies 
of  our  Lord  (Matt.  I.,  Luke  III.),  each  of  the  beatitudes  (Matt, 
v.),  and  of  the  parables  in  Matt.  XIII. ,  forming  a  separate 
paragraph ;  but  such  a  case  will  oftentimes  not  occur  for  sev- 
eral consecutive  pages.  The  writer's  plan  was  to  proceed 
steadily  with  a  book  until  it  was  finished  :  then  to  break  off 
from  the  column  he  was  writing,  and  to  begin  the  next  book 
on  the  very  next  column.  Thus  only  one  column  perfectly 
blank  is  found  in  the  whole  volume,  that  which  follows 
i<f)ofiovvTo  yap  in  Mark  XVI.  8  ;  and  since  Cod.  B  is  the  only 
one  yet  known,  except  Cod.  ^,  that  actually  omits  the  last 
twelve  verses  of  that  Gospel,  by  leaving  such  a  space  the 
scribe  has  intimated  that  he  was  fully  aware  of  their 
existence,  or  even  found  them  in  the  copy  from  which 
he  wrote.  The  capital  letters  at  the  beginning  of  each 
book  are  likewise  due  to  the  corrector,  who  sometimes 
erased,  sometimes  merely  touched  slightly,  the  original  initial 
letter,  which  (as  in  the  Herculanean  rolls)  is  no  larger  than 
any  other. 

These  later  capitals  in  blue  or  red,  three-quarters  of  an 
inch  high,  and  the  broad  green  bar,  surmounted  with  three 
red  crosses,  which  habitually  stands  at  the  head  of  a 
book,  are  in  paint,  and  by  the  same  second  hand." 


THE  UNCIAL  CODICES.  447 

"  Tischendorf  says  truly  enough  that  something  like  a  his- 
tory might  be  written  of  the  futile  attempts  to  collate  Cod.  B. 
The  manuscript  is  first   distinctly  heard    of   (for  it  does  not 
appear  to  have  been  used  for  the  Complutensian  Polyglott)  by 
Sepulveda,  to  whose  correspondence  with  Erasmus,  attention 
has  been  seasonably  recalled  by  Tregelles.     Writing  in  1534, 
he  says,  *  Est  enim  Graecum  exemplar  antiquissimum  in  Bib- 
liotheca  Vaticana,  in  quo  diligentissime  et  accuratissime  Uteris 
majusculis   conscriptum    utrumque    Testamentum   continetur 
long^  diversum  a  vulgatis  exemplaribus : '  and  after  noticing 
as  a  weighty  proof  of  its  excellence  its  agreement  with  the 
Latin  version  (multum  convenitcumvetere  nostra  translatione) 
against   the   common    Greek   text   (vulgatam    Graecorum   ed- 
itionem),  he  furnishes  Erasmus  with  365  readings  as  a  con- 
vincing  argument    in   support  of  his    statements.     It   would 
probably  be  from  this  list  that  in  his  Annotations  to  the  Acts, 
published  in   1535,   Erasmus   cites   the  reading  KavSa,   Chap. 
XXVII.  16,  from  a  Greek  Codex   in  the  Pontificial  Library, 
since  for  this  reading  Cod.  B  is  the  only  known  Greek  witness. 
It  seems,  however,  that  he  had  obtained  some  account  of  this 
manuscript  from  Paul  Bombasius  as  early  as  1521  (see  Wet- 
stein's  Proleg.  N.  T.  I.  p.  23).     Lucas  Brugensis,  who  published 
in  his  Notationes  in  S.  Biblia  in  1580,  and  his  Commentary  on 
the  Four  Gospels  (dedicated  to  Cardinal  Bellarmine)  in  1606, 
made  known  certain  extracts  from  Cod.  B  taken  by  Werner  of 
Nimuegen  ;  that  most  imperfect  collection  was  the  only  source 
from  which  Mill  and  even  Wetstein  had  any  knowledge  of  the 
contents   of    this   first-rate    document."      In    1868    Laurence 
Alexander  Zacagni,  Librarian  of  the  Vatican,  in  his  Preface  to 
the  Collectanea   Monumentorum    Veterum    Eccles.,  describes 
Cod.  B,  and  especially  its  peculiar  division  into  sections,  in  a 
passage  cited  by  Mill  (Proleg.  §  1480.)     In   1669  indeed  the 
first  real  collation  of  the  manuscript  had  been  attempted  by 
Bartolocci,  then  librarian  of  the  Vatican;  from  some  accident, 
however,  it  was  never  published.     In    18 10,    however,   when 
with  the  other  best  treasures  of  the  Vatican,  Codex  B  was  at 
Paris,  the  celebrated  critic  J.  L.  Hug  sent   forth  his  treatise 
*  de  Antiquitate  Vaticani  Codicis  Commentatio,'  and  though 
even  he  did  not  perceive  the  need  of  a  new  and  full  collation 
of  it,  he  has  the  merit  of  first  placing  it  in  the  paramount  rank 
it  still  holds,  as  one  of  the  oldest  and  most  valuable  of  extant 
monuments  of  sacred  antiquity.     His  conclusion  respecting  its 
date,  not  later  than  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century,  has  been 
acquiesced  in  with  little  opposition,  though  Tischendorf  de- 


448  THE  UNCIAL  CODICES. 

clares  rather  pithily  that  he  holds  this  belief  '  non  propter 
Hugium  sed  cum  Hugio.'  In  1843  Tischendorf,  after  long 
and  anxious  expectation  during  a  visit  to  Rome  that  lasted 
some  months,  obtained  a  sight  of  it  for  two  days  of  six 
hours  each." 

The  rapidity  with  which  Tischendorf's  collation  of  the 
Vatican  MS.  was  made,  may  be  judged  from  his  own  words, 
Prolegomena,  p.  143.  On  two  successive  occasions  for  six 
hours  each,  he  was  allowed  to  have  the  great  Codex  in  his 
hands.  He  declares  that  in  that  short  period  he  prepared  four 
fac-similes  for  publication,  and  also  ran  through  the  whole  work, 
"  universum  librum  attente  percurrissem."  Such  rapid  colla- 
tion even  by  this  extraordinary  man  was  too  rapid  to  be  of 
much  critical  worth. 

The  authorities  of  the  Vatican  rightly  esteeming  the  great 
worth  of  this  Codex,  jealously  guarded  it  from  the  curiosity  of 
those  eager  to  see  it,  and  in  this  faithful  guard  may  have  some- 
times excluded  good  critics  from  collating  it. 

Certain  obscure  bigots  complain  of  this,  as  they  systemati- 
cally  complain  of  everything  Rome  does,  but  the  real  student 
of  history  will  commend  such  custody,  which  has  preserved  for 
us  a  literature  through  the  vicissitudes  of  time. 

We  are  more  fortunate  than  our  predecessors,  for  in  our 
days  a  splendid  edition  has  been  published,  under  the  auspices 
of  Pius  IX.,  by  C.  Vercellone  and  J.  Cozza.  This  edition  is 
based  almost  wholly  on  the  labors  of  the  great  critic,  Cardi- 
nal Mai. 

The  second  in  importance  of  the  great  Codices  is  undoubt- 
edly the  Codex  Sinaiticus  ^  of  Tischendorf. 

The  history  of  this  great  Codex  is  related  by  its  discoverer 
in  his  preface  to  his  great  edition  of  1863. 

During  the  four  years  succeeding  the  autumn  of  1840,  by 
visiting  the  libraries  of  Paris,  England,  Holland, Switzerland,  and 
Italy,  I  had  nearly  completed  a  design  of  promoting  a  critical 
study  of  the  Sacred  Books,  conceived  in  the  preparation  of 
the  first  edition  of  the  New  Testament.  I  then  desired  noth- 
ing more  than  to  visit  the  East  itself,  whence  so  many  monu- 
ments of  ancient  learning  have  come  into  the  libraries  of 
Europe.  Through  the  particular  favor  of  Frederic  Augustus, 
the  excellent  King  of  Saxony,  this  desire  was  so  gratified 
that  I  spent  most  of  the  year  of  1844  in  exploring  the  countries 
of  the  Orient ;  chiefly  those  in  which  the  old  monasteries 
exist. 


THE   UNCIAL   CODICES.  449 

It  is  well  known  that  this  Oriental  journey  has  become 
famous  through  some  Greek  fragments  of  the  Old  Testament, 
which  I  sent  to  my  native  country,  dedicated  to  my  royal  and 
noble  patron  as  a  pledge  of  love  and  fidelity.  They  were 
deposited  in  the  library  of  Leipzig,  and  shortly  afterwards 
published. 

I  discovered  these  fragments  of  a  very  old  Codex  of  the 
Septuagint  in  the  month  of  May,  1844.  While  investigating 
old  books  in  St.  Catherine's  Monastery  on  Mt.  Sinai,  I  chanced 
upon  a  basket,  containing  remnants  of  various  torn  and  de- 
stroyed codices.  Many  of  these  fragments  had  already  found 
their  way  to  the  fire-place.  As  these  fragments  were  con- 
sidered worthless  and  were  about  to  be  destroyed,  I  easily  ob- 
tained possession  of  them.  I  was  refused,  however,  other 
larger  parts  of  the  same  Codex,  which  were  rescued  from  the 
same  neglect,  and  in  which  the  whole  of  Isaias  and  the  Books 
of  the  Maccabees  were  written.  I  exhorted  that  these  por- 
tions should  be  preserved  with  greater  care,  hoping  to  after- 
wards agree  upon  the  terms  of  their  surrender  to  me. 

Being  disappointed,  contrary  to  my  expectation,  in  such 
negotiation,  I  determined,  in  my  second  journey  to  the  East 
in  1853,  to  accurately  transcribe  all  that  remained  of  the  afore- 
said Codex,  for  a  future  edition. 

But  when  I  visited  Sinai's  Mount  and  St.  Catherine's 
Monastery  the  second  time,  I  neither  saw  the  treasure  which 
I  sought,  nor  learned  whither  it  had  gone.  I  concluded  from 
this,  that  it  had  been  carried  to  Europe,  and  that  there  was  no 
hope  left  of  my  possessing  it.  In  1855  when  I  published  the 
first  volume  of  my  Monumenta  Sacra,  I  edited  therewith  the 
last  page  of  the  text  of  Isaias  (which  I  had  already  transcribed 
in  1844),  and  I  made  known  that  this  Codex  Frederico-Augus- 
tanus,  and  also  the  remaining  fragments  of  the  same  ancient 
book,  wheresoever  found,  had  been  saved  by  me  from  de- 
struction. 

Having  maturely  thought  of  the  project,  toward  the  close 
of  1856,  with  the  consent  of  Paul  of  Falkenstein,  one  of  the 
chief  ministers  of  the  King  of  Saxony,  I  delivered  letters  to 
the  Russian  Legate  at  Dresden,  asking  for  the  authority  of 
the  Emperor  Alexander  II.  to  set  out  for  the  East  to  investi- 
gate and  acquire  possession  of  old  Codices,  both  Greek  and 
Oriental,  chiefly  those  of  the  Sacred  Books.  The  eminent  men 
Abraham  de  Noroff  and  E.  de  Kowalevsky  interceded  for  me, 
also  the  Illustrious  Theodore  de  Grimm,  the  former  tutor  of 

Constantine,  the  Emperor's  brother,  and  actually  instructor  of 
cc 


460  THE  UNCIAL  CODICES. 

the  Crown  Prince  Nicolas.  The  Imperial  Academy  of  St. 
Petersburg  endorsed  my  petition,  and  the  Empress  Maria,  with 
her  characteristic  greatness  of  soul  favored  me,  and  thus  the 
most  renowned  Emperor,  a  man  indeed  upright  and  good,  in 
the  middle  of  September  1858,  bade  me  execute  my  proposal. 

But  at  this  time  my  seventh  edition  of  the  New  Testament 
claimed  my  attention.  This  edition  was  finished  at  the  close 
of  1858,  and  in  the  beginning  of  1859,  ^  started  on  my  journey 
to  the  East.  I  made  my  third  visit  to  the  monastery  of  St. 
Catherine  on  the  last  day  of  January,  and  was  most  kindly 
welcomed  by  the  brothers. 

The  venerable  bishop  expressed  a  wish  that  by  my  studies,. 
I  might  find  new  proofs  for  the  divine  truths. 

I  had  already  sent  one  of  the  servants  to  procure  camels, 
intending  to  set  out  for  Egypt  on  the  7th  of  February,  when, 
on  the  4th  of  the  same  month,  I  was  walking  with  the  econome 
of  the  monastery,  and  conversing  of  the  Septuagint.  I  had 
brought  to  the  monks  several  copies  of  my  edition  of  this,  and 
some  copies  of  my  New  Testament. 

On  returning  from  the  walk,  we  entered  the  econome's 
room.  Thereupon  he  said  he  had  a  copy  of  the  Septuagint 
and  he  placed  it  before  me,  wrapped  in  a  cloth.  I  opened  the 
cloth  and  saw  something  beyond  my  hopes.  For  there  before 
me,  I  saw  very  numerous  fragments  of  the  Codex,  which  I 
had  long  declared  to  be  the  most  ancient  of  the  Greek  codices, 
extant  in  parchment.  Among  these  fragments  I  perceived, 
still  in  preservation,  not  only  many  books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment (including  those  taken  from  the  waste  basket  in  1844), 
but  also,  which  was  by  far  the  most  valuable,  the  whole  New 
Testament  in  perfect  condition,  and  augmented  by  the  entire 
Epistle  of  Barnabas,  to  which  was  added  the  first  part  of 
Pastor.  I  could  not  disguise  the  astonishment  wrought  by 
such  a  discovery.  With  the  consent  of  the  steward,  I  trans- 
ferred to  my  room  the  book,  or  rather  the  fragments  of  the 
book ;  for  each  leaf  was  rent  into  many  parts  and  was  covered 
only  by  the  cloth.  The  steward  himself  had  taken  the  frag- 
ments from  the  cell  of  the  (TKevo(f>v\a^,  which  contained  writ- 
ten and  printed  books,  the  greater  part  liturgical  with  varied 
liturgical  apparatus.  He  had  collected  all  the  extant  frag- 
ments of  the  Codex  shortly  after  my  first  eastern  journey.  I 
took  them  all  to  my  room  and  then  I  fully  realized  how  great 
a  treasure  I  held  in  my  hands,  and  I  praised  and  thanked  God, 
the  author  of  so  great  a  benefit  to  the  Church,  to  letters,  and 
to  myself.     I  spent  the  first  night  in  transcribing  the  Epistle 


THE   UNCIAL  CODICES.  451 

of  Barnabas,  for  to  sleep  at  such  a  time  seemed  unlawful, 
"quippe  dormire  nefas  videbatur."  The  day  following  I  ar- 
ranged with  the  monks,  that  if  the  superiors  at  Cairo  should  so 
order,  they  would  send  the  Codex  thither  to  me  to  be  trans- 
cribed. Setting  out  on  the  appointed  day  with  the  kind  letters 
of  the  monk  Cyrill,  the  learned  librarian  of  the  monastery,  I 
reached  Cairo  the  thirteenth  day  of  February,  where,  through 
the  favor  of  Agathangelus,  the  venerable  prior  of  the  cloister, 
the  enterprise  so  prospered,  that,  a  thing  seemingly  incredible, 
a  messenger  traversed  the  deserts  of  Arabia  and  Egypt  twice, 
within  nine  days,  and  I  received  from  the  hands  of  the  Super- 
iors the  ancient  parchments,  on  the  twenty-fourth  day  of  the 
same  month.  As  had  been  agreed  upon,  the  transcription  of 
the  whole  Codex  was  undertaken  without  delay,  and  with  the 
help  of  two  natives,  one  a  doctor  of  medicine,  the  other  a 
pharmacist,  it  was  finished  within  two  months. 

Although  I  revised,  letter  by  letter  the  work  of  my  asso- 
ciates, and  also  that  which  I  transcribed  with  my  own  hand,  I 
plainly  perceived  that  the  method  of  the  old  correctors  was 
greatly  defective,  and  that  the  Codex  needed  a  revision,  in 
order  that  I  might  confidently  undertake  an  accurate  edition 
of  it. 

In  the  meantime,  I  proposed  to  the  venerable  brethren  of 
Sinai  that  they  should  send  the  Codex  through  me,  as  a  pledge 
of  their  special  affection  to  Alexander  II.,  the  ornament  and 
defender  of  the  orthodox  faith.  They  heartily  approved  of 
my  proposition. 

But  now  Constantius,  the  Archbishop,  who  had  formerly 
been  patriarch,  died.  The  administrator  of  the  college  in  the 
interim,  an  eminent  man,  had,  by  unanimous  vote,  been  chosen 
to  succeed  the  deceased  prelate,  but  had  not  yet  been  conse- 
crated. At  this  juncture  a  certain  one,  who  arrogated  to  him- 
self authority,  opposed  me,  but  the  venerable  college  con- 
ceded what  I  greatly  urged,  that  I  might  bring  the  Codex  to 
St.  Petersburg  to  prepare  from  it  a  correct  edition.  It  was 
only  loaned  me  for  a  time,  till  the  Archbishop  should  ratify  in 
the  name  of  the  college  its  perpetual  transfer.  On  this  con- 
dition the  Codex  was  delivered  to  me  at  Cairo,  on  the  28th  of 
September,  1859. 

Recalling  the  pleasant  memory  of  this  affair,  I  am  moved 
to  gratitude  towards  the  venerable  brethren  for  their  benevo- 
lence, and  trust  in  me,  and  I  commend  them  for  the  nobility 
of  mind  and  liberality  with  which  they  promoted  the  cause  of 
Christian  learning." 


452  THE  UNCIAL  CODICES. 

Tischendorf  arrived  in  St.  Petersburg  in  November,  where 
he  was  received  with  great  respect  by  the  Emperor.  The 
Codex  was  exposed  to  public  view  in  the  imperial  library  for 
two  weeks.  By  the  aid  of  the  Emperor,  type  was  cast  by 
which  the  great  Codex  was  faithfully  reproduced.  The  labor 
expended  in  this  edition  can  scarely  be  realized.  In  i86i  the 
great  work  was  accomplished,  and  on  the  nth  of  September 
of  that  year  the  splendid  edition  was  presented  to  the  Empe- 
ror. In  1863,  Tischendorf  published  an  edition  of  the  New 
Testament  for  popular  use,  in  which  he  has  reproduced  the 
exact  form  of  the  original  Codex  in  modern  Greek 
characters. 

"  The  Codex  Sinaiticus,  as  we  learn  from  Tischendorf's 
Notitia,  consists  of  345^  leaves  of  beautiful  vellum,  of  which 
199  contain  portions  of  the  Septuagint  version.  147^2  leaves 
contain  the  whole  New  Testament,  Barnabas'  Epistle,  and  por- 
tions of  Hermas'  Shepherd.  Each  page  comprises  four  columns, 
with  48  lines  in  each  column,  of  continuous,  noble,  simple 
uncials.  The  poetical  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  however, 
being  written  in  crrixoi^  admit  of  only  two  columns  on  a  page. 
The  order  of  the  sacred  books  is  remarkable,  though  not  unpre- 
cedented. St.  Paul's  Epistles  precede  the  Acts,  and  among 
them,  that  to  the  Hebrews  follows  II.  Thess.,  standing  on  the 
same  page  with  it.  Breathings  and  accents  there  are  none ; 
the  apostrophus,  and  a  single  point  for  punctuation,  are  entirely 
absent  for  pages  together,  yet  occasionally  are  rather  thickly 
studded,  not  only  in  places  where  a  later  hand  has  been  unusu- 
ally  busy.  Even  the  words  very  usually  abridged  (except 
^cr,  K(T.,  Lcr,  x"^")  "^^^  which  are  constant)  are  here  written  in  full, 
as  TraTTjp,  BaveiS ;  the  practice  varies  for  vio<i,  ovpavo<i,  avdpcoiro^;. 
We  find  lapaTjX',  LcrX  or  njX:  iepova-aXrj/x,  hj/jl^  I'V^H'',  or  vXfi. 
Tischendorf  considers  the  two  points  over  iota  and  upsilon 
(which  are  sometimes  wanting)  as  seldom  from  the  first  hand. 
Words  are  divided  at  the  end  of  a  line  as  capriciously  as  can 
be  imagined  :  thus  K  in  OTK  is  repeatedly  separated  without 
need.  Small  letters,  of  the  most  perfect  shape,  freely  occur  in 
all  places,  especially  at  the  end  of  lines.  Numerals  are  repre- 
sented by  letters,  with  a  straight  line  placed  over  them  (e.  g. 
/x  Mark.  I.  13).  Although  there  are  no  capitals,  the  initial 
letter  of  a  line  which  begins  a  sentence  generally  stands  out 
from  the  rank  of  the  rest.  The  annexed  plates  exhibit  Heb. 
XII.  27. — XIII.  in  original  characters  reproduced  by  Tischen- 
dorf, and  in  cursive  characters. 


T  H  M  T  u>  N  c  XKe  Y 
CI  HCDcnenoiH 

M  e  H  CI>  N  1  H  X  M 1  M-l 

T>KM  H  cxKe-yoM  eNK 

h\  O  R  XC I  \e  I XN  XCA 
X€YTON  nXJ'A^AKU. 
EXMOKITeceXOM^ 

X  KF » »^  ^  ^  CAXTpT 

OM  eN  6  YXf  ecTcu* 

TCU  OCJ  H  €  TKe7>x 

g  I  KCK  Kl'i^^O YC KN 

rxp  o  e  c  H  M  cu  N  n-jr 

KXTXNXXICKON 

H  <h\  XXX€ XO I  XHe 
M^TCUTHNTCblXO 
i:€M  1XM  M  HeniKK 

exKieceeMxnrxY 
THcrxpexxeoNTi 

MeC5.eMlCANT€c 

xrrexoYc 

Ml  M  NHCKeceXIT^ 
KeCMlCUNCOCCT 

AexeMeNoiTcow 

KXKOYXOY^^<^^^" 
CUCKXlXYTO»ON, 

Te C€  Kl COJ) M  XTl ' 

TIMlOCOrXMOCeN 

nXCI  N  KXI  H  KOIT* 

XM  lXNTOCnofN*7- 

rxpKXiMoixoYc 


KfiMioec 
Kcbixxf  rYpocoTPO 
hocxfKOYMertoi^      exa^THcnvxHCT^i 


Ymintonaoton 
yo  voy^^  n  xm  xg€ 

CJDpOYNTeCTHNtK 
BXCIHTHCXNXaf. 
dbHCM  IMeiCOXlTH 
hiCTIN 

]cxcexeecKxicH 

M  ePON  OAYTOCK 
€1  CTOYCXICD  H  X* 

/^ixxxxicnoiKi 

XXICKXiXeNXiCMi 

nxPX4^efeceeKX 

XONrxpXXf  ITI^e 

K  XI  OYCe  e  TH  n  kh* 

XI  KN  OY  B  f<^  •^^"•'^ 

en  oicoYKcijd>e 

XH  ejH  CXNOlrtcpi 

nxTOYNiec 
exoMeNeYCixn^H 

tioNei[OY4>xrer 
YKe xoyci  m ex-y 

CIXN  OITHCKHHH 

xxTfCYONTeccDN 
rXfeiccbepeTxu- 
OJNTOAI  MXnepi 

XMXfTIACeiCTXX 

n  XXI  xTOYA^r  X  i  € 
|>  e  cx>  cTo  YT<^  M  jx 

CCJL>M  XTXKXTXKXI 
€TX|€TcUTHCnX 

pen  ROXHC 

AlOKAIICl'NXXn 

xc  H  A I XTO  Y » X I  oy 

XI  MXTOCTONXX** 


TocrxpeiPHKeN-y 
M  H  cexN  cuoYJ^onr 
MHceerKXTXxei 

TAc  H  M  xcxerki  ki 
K  c  e  M  o  1  R  o  H  e  o*f  < 

OYcbORHeHCOMAI 
Tin  OIHCeiMOiKH 

e|>ajrTOC 

M  N  H  MONey€T€j^ 

HroYM€Ma3NY"^ 
OITI  NecexAxH-x 


YNexep: 
o  xn  pocXY  TOM  £2* 

THCnXf  eM  BOXH*^ 

TONONCIXICMOH 

XYnnoY^^^f  ^ '^  T^" 
OYrxpexoMeH*** 

ACM  e  M  OYCXH  n- 

A I  NXAXXTH  N  M*X 

xoycAM  eniZHT"T 

i^  I  xYToyxM  x<f>^p- 
MeNoycixNArN* 

cecjD  CXI  An  XNT-*^ 


jco  e  CD  Toy  re  ct  i  h 
KxpnoNxeiKecuN 

OM  0>vOroYNT<^»^ 
Tcuo  N  OM  XTlATT^ 

TH  CAee  yno  1 1  >vci^ 

KOINCUNfXCMIi 

€ni\KNexNecee 
To  I  xyrxi  c  FiKfaYci 

A^ICeYXFeCTlTAlo 

e  c 
n  €  I  eeceero i  c hk 

M6NOICyMCjDH 

KAiyneiKeTeAy^'*^ 
Ayroirxf/^rpYnNoy 
c\  NYneprcuN^y 

XCUNYMCDNOJCK 
TON  KnOACJjCOH 
T6  Ci  N  AM  eTAXA|'^f 
- TO  YTO  n  O  I CJDCI  N 
KAl  MHCTeNA:zc5" 

TecAAYciTe\ec 

TAPYMINTOYTO 

nroceyxeceep^ 

GAJnkpOTl  KAAH  N 
CYNI  AHClN€XO 

M  e  N  e  N  n  AC  I N  KA. 

ACUCe€AONT6CA 

N  AcTf  ed>eceAJ 

n  epiCCOT6.)>CUCAe 

n  Af  AKAACUTOyro 
n  O I  H  C  AJ I  N  ATAX'I 
ON  ArTOKAXACTA 
BCD Yjs^  IN 

O  AeecTH  ceifHHi- 

O  KN  APArCJD  N  €KN* 
KPCUHTONnOlM* 
N  ATCO  N  n  p  O  B  AT-" 
TONMerANeHAI 
HATIAIAOHKH^AI 
CDNIOYTONKNH 
MCUN  I  N  K  ATApTI 
CAlYMACeNHAN    . 

Ti  AFA  e  CD  e  I  cTOn-i 

HCAITOeeAHMA 

AYTo  Y^^'y^  ^  O I 

<X>  N  e  N  H  M  I  NTO^T 
ApecTON€NCJDni»^ 


AYTOYA I  Ki  Yxyco  h 
A^oiKeicrroYCAfcij 

N  KCTCUN  AlCUNClJ 
AMHN 

nApKKAACDAeyMAf 
AAeA'd^OIANexe 

c  e  €  TO  Y  AO  ro  YTH  «^ 

n  ApAK  AH  CeCJDCKAMtJf 

/s^iABpAxecuNen* 

CTIAAYHIN 

re  I  N  CDC  KereroH 

AAeAcboNHMcUN 

Ti  M  o  e  e  OH  xnoK* 

AY^^^ONNieeoy 
6AMTAXlONepXHi\i, 

ceeo^oHAiYMAf 
AC  n  ACAce  Ai  n  >nm 

TACTOyC  H  TOY  H  ^ 
NOyCYMCUNKAJ 

n  ANTACTOYCATI-T 

AcnxzoNTAiY'^A- 

O  I  An  OTH  CI  TAAIK* 

H  X  AF I  CM  CTAH  AH 

YLU  N  YH  CD  N^»-»^^^>^ 


n  p«c         'BpAi-Y 


i   TO  So  tn  arral  hrikor. 
i     nf|v  Tov  aaXsu 

^      OpiSVOV  {J.£ta0£  * 
I'   .  (JIV  txy  TCETCOIT) 

jievov  ha,  pitvTj 
Ta  jxTj  aaX£U0(X£va 
hio  ^aaiXeiav  aaa 
XeuTov  rapaXajji. 
^avovTsa  sxojjir 
;^a(jtv  Bt,  Tfjff  Xaxpsu 
0|Ji£v  euapecToa 
"CO  00  [xsTa  £uXa 
^ia(T  xat  S£ourf  xat  * 
•yap  0  Ga  tjijlov  itup 
xaxavaX'.axov- 
TQ  9iXaB£Xcpia  yi£ 
vexo  TYjv  91X0 ' 
|£vtav  yiY]  cTciXftT'  ■• 
OaveaOE  ^ta  xau 
'01(7  7ap  eXaOov  th 
veer  f£vL(7avT£a 
a'YYsXoua 
p.i[xvTfiax£(70at  roT" 
Se(j|j.iov  ^,)(7  mT 
SsSejievoi  Tttv 
y-axouxou{jL£vcr 
<o(7  xat  auToi  o» 
Tea  &v  aoitaxi- 
ttpiiocp  0  Yajtoo"  ev 
icacFiy  xai  tj  xoittj 
otjjtiavToa  iropvouff 
•^aj^  xat.  jjLot/ou(J 

ttcpiXap-^upOff  0  T^o 
t:o(7  apxou{j.£voi 
TOtc  irapouaiv  au 
T0(7  Yap  £ipTix£v  0^ 
[jLTj  ae  avo  ouS  ot> 
JIT]  7e  eyxaTaXet 
7:0  o(7Te  Gappo\»** 
Tacf  Y][i,aa  Xe^eiv 
yr;  ejjiot  ^oiQOca-  * 
ov  ^o^TjOriacjJiai 

Tt  T:0'-7]a£t  {JLOttt» 

|XV;f)[JlOV£U£T£  tgT 
T)Y0V|JL£VOV   UJJLgT 


Uy.IV  TOV  XoYov 
Toy  6t>  ov  avaSe 
QpouvTsa  TYJV  ex 
^a(7(.v  T7)(7  avaaxpo 

TC'.aTlV 

ia  /a  e/Oea  xai  (nj 
jxepov  0  auxocT  v; 
elcr  xou(7  aiovaa 

Xaic7  xat,  ^evai<7  jJiTfj 

TCapacpepeaCe  xa 
Xov  -yap  xapixt  ^e 
^aio.uaOe  xi^v  xap 
Biav  ou  ^pb[i,oC(7u^ 
evoia  oux.  ocpe 
XifjGTfiCTav  01  Tuept 
Tcaxouvxea  ^ 
exojxev  GuoriaaxTj 
piov  £^  01)  9aY£r 
oux  e^ouaiv  e^ou 
ciav  01  XTj  axTiviq 
Xaxpeuovxea  ov 
Y*P  eia9£p£xat.  ^o 
«v  TO  at{i.a  nepi  . 
apLo-pTiaa  eia  Ta  a. 
ryta  Sia  to\>  apx^e 
peoa  XQUT0V  Ta 
<7Q{4aTa  xafaxat 
eTat  e?(.>  tYjo"  Tta 
'peji^oXTjcj 
Sio  xat  ia  Iva  ayi 
affT)  Sia  Tou  (.Btou 
ai[jLaT0(7  TOV  Xad" 

elw  TT|(7  TUuXYja  TQ6  ' 

vuv  elepx^jxe 
Ga  Tcpoo"  auTov  e|o 
TY^cr  TCapepL^oXYja 
TOV  oveiSia^ov 

autOU  9£pCVT£(7 

ov  Y^p  ^x^\t.zv  o 
Be  p.£vou(7av  tto 
Xiv  aXXa  ttjv  jxeX 
Xouaav  ETCt^YiTOv 
jxev 
St  auTou  ava9£po  * 
l^ev  Guaiav  aive 
CEoa  SiaTtavTOSJ" 


TO  0G)  TOUTecrxtv 
xapTCOv  xetXeov 

QJJLOXOYOUVXOV 

xo  ovojxaxi  auxou 
TYiG  S£  £U7i:ouaa  y; 
xotvoviaa  [jly) 

ETCiXavGaveaGE 
TotauTttia  Yap  Gucjt 
'iOLiG  euapecTiTai  0 

TUEiGEaGe  Toia  tjyou 
|ji£voia  iipiov 
xai  uTuetxexe  au  ' 
Toi  Yo^P  aYpuTTvou  ^ 
civ-iJTuep  Tov^l^u 

J/OV  UJJLOV  OCX  Xo 

YO''  aTCoSoCTov 

Tea  iva  pteTa  xapaij 

TOUTO  TCOtOdlV 

xat  jjLYj  ffTeva^o" 
Te(7  aXugtTeXea 

YOp  OpilV  TOUXO 

T:poa£iJX£(7G£  tc£  • 
pi  "yjiJiov  OTt,  xaXiQ"'  ^* 
Ga  Yap  on  xaXT)v  ^ 

<7UVtST)aiV  £^0 

{jLev  ev  -aaiv  xa 
Xoc  GeXovTea  a 
vaaTp£9e(7Gai 
Tcepiaaoxepocr  ht 
TrapaxaXw  touto 
TcotYjaa',  Iva  Tax£i 
ov  ttTCoxaTacxa 
Go  iipiiv 

t  Be  G(7  XYja  eipYjviqa- 
0  avaYaYov  ex  ve 
xpov  xov  rroijie 
va  xov  TCpo^axo" 
xov  jxEYav  £v  at 
jxaxt  StaGYjXTjT  at 

tOVtOU'TOV  XV  7) 
JJIOV  tV  XttTapTt 

I7at  iJjjLaa  £v  Trav 
"tt  aYaGo  eia  to-  tuoi 
7]  cat  TO  OeXTjpia 
auTou  auTo  Tcot " 
ov  ev  Yj^jLtv  TO  eu 
ap£(7T0v  evoTticT 


auTOu  Sta  tu  JQ  o  T^ 
So|a  et<7  TOUd'  ato., 
vac;  TOV  atovo~ 
ajJLiqv- 
TrapaxaXo  Be  u|j.a7 
aS^.90t  ave/e 
cGe  TOU  XoYcu  TTja. 
rapaxXiqaeocr  xat  ** 
Sta  ppax*6)v  ei^e 
(7TtXa  iipitv 

YetVO0'X6Te:.T0V 

aBeX90v  Yjpcov  ** 
TipioGeov  aitoXe 
Xujjievov  pi£0  ou 
eav  Ta^tov  epx"0  '* 
(jGe  otj;o}xat  iJ[jLacr". 

acTraaaoGat  7i:av 
Ta(7  Tovff  T^You^e 
voua  iJixov  xat 
^avTacj  T0U(7  aYto\«?. 

ao"7:a^ovTat  ujjiaa 
ot  aTCO  x-qc  tTaXta,5r, 
Yj  X*?'-'^  l^-^'^a  ^av 
TOV  iJji.ov^* 


TCpoff '  e^patouff 


454  THE  UNCIAL  CODICES. 

The  vellum  of  the  manuscript  is  very  thin  and  smooth.  Ac- 
cording to  Tischendorf  it  was  made  of  the  skins  of  antelopes 
or  asses.  The  fleshy  side  of  the  skin,  being  softer,  has  not 
preserved  the  writing  so  plainly  as  the  other  side.  Every  skin 
was  folded  so  as  to  form  eight  pages. 

Many  corrections  of  later  hands  appear  in  the  Codex. 

Historical  data  are  wanting  to  determine  its  age.  From 
internal  evidence  Tischendorf  refers  it  to  the  fourth  century, 
and  his  judgment  is  acquiesced  in  by  nearly  all  critics.  Tischen- 
dorf exalts  its  value  above  that  of  any  other  Codex  in  the 
world,  but  perhaps  the  highest  tribute  compatible  with  truth 
would  be  that  it  ranks  next  in  excellence  to  the  Vatican 
Codex. 

The  Codex  contains  all  the  books  of  the  New  Testament ; 
and  adds  Pastor  and  Barnabas'  Epistle.  The  Old  Testament 
is  mutilated  so  that  nearly  all  the  historical  books  are  wanting. 

The  Codex  is  preserved  in  the  Imperial  Library  at  St. 
Petersburg. 

The  Codex  Alexandrinus,  or  Alexandrian  manuscript, 
which  is  noted  by  the  letter  A  in  Wetstein's,  Griesbach's,  and 
Scholz's  critical  editions  of  the  New  Testament,  consists  of 
four  folio  volumes ;  the  three  first  contain  the  whole  of  the 
Old  Testament,  together  with  some  apocryphal  books,  and  the 
fourth  comprises  the  New  Testament,  the  First  Epistle  of 
Clement  to  the  Corinthians,  and  the  apocryphal  Psalms 
ascribed  to  Solomon.  In  the  New  Testament  there  is  wanting 
the  beginning  as  far  as  Matt.  XXV.  6.  o  vvfi(j)Lo<i  epx^rai;  like- 
wise from  John  VI.  50.  to  VIII.  52,  and  from  II.  Cor.  IV.  13.  to 
XII.  7.  The  Psalms  are  preceded  by  the  epistle  of  Athanasius 
to  Marcellinus,  and  followed  by  a  catalogue  containing  those 
which  are  to  be  used  in  prayer  for  each  hour,  both  of  the  day 
and  of  the  night ;  also  by  fourteen  hymns,  partly  apocryphal, 
partly  biblical,  the  eleventh  of  which  is  the  hymn  of  the  Virgin 
Mary,  termed  the  Magnificat,  (Luke  I.  47 — 55.)  and  here  en- 
titled 'n-poaevxv  Ma/3ta?  tt;?  @€otokov,  or,  ^Ae  prayer  of  Mary 
tJie  mother  of  God ;  the  arguments  of  Eusebius  are  annexed  to 
the  Psalms,  and  his  Canons  to  the  Gospels.  This  manuscript 
is  now  preserved  in  the  British  Museum,  where  it  was  deposited 
in  1753.  It  was  sent  as  a  present  to  King  Charles  I.  from 
Cyrillus  Lucaris,  a  native  of  Crete,  and  patriarch  of  Constanti- 
nople, by  Sir  Thomas  Rowe,  ambassador  from  England  to  the 
Grand  Seignior,  in  the  year  1628.  Cyrillus  brought  it  with 
him  from  Alexandria,  where,  probably,  it  was  written.  In  a 
schedule  annexed  to  it,  he  gives  this  account ;    that  it  was 


THE   UNCIAL   CODICES.  465 

written,  according  to  tradition,  by  Thecla,  a  noble  Egyptian 
lady,  about  thirteen  hundred  years  ago,  a  little  after  the  coun- 
cil of  Nice.  He  adds,  that  the  name  of  Thecla,  at  the  end  of 
the  book,  was  erased ;  but  that  this  was  the  case  with  other 
books  of  the  Christians,  after  Christianity  was  extinguished  in 
Egypt  by  the  Mohammedans ;  and  that  recent  tradition 
records  the  fact  of  the  laceration  and  erasure  of  Thecla's  name. 
The  proprietor  of  this  manuscript,  before  it  came  into  the 
hands  of  Cyrillus  Lucaris,  had  written  an  Arabic  subscription, 
expressing  that  this  book  was  said  to  have  been  written  with 
the  pen  of  Thecla  the  Martyr. 

Various  disputes  have  arisen  with  regard  to  the  place 
whence  it  was  brought,  and  where  it  was  written,  to  its 
antiquity,  and  of  course  to  its  real  value.  Some  critics  have 
bestowed  upon  it  the  highest  commendation,  whilst  it  has  been 
equally  depreciated  by  others.  Of  its  most  strenuous  adver- 
saries, Wetstein  seems  to  have  been  the  principal.  The  place 
from  which  it  was  sent  to  England  was,  without  doubt, 
Alexandria,  and  hence  it  has  been  called  the  Codex  Alexan- 
drinus.  As  to  the  place  where  it  was  written,  there  is  a  con- 
siderable difference  of  opinion.  Matthaeus  Muttis,  who  was  a 
contemporary  friend,  and  deacon  of  Cyrillus,  and  who  after- 
wards instructed  in  the  Greek  language  John  Rudolph  Wet- 
stein, uncle  of  the  celebrated  editor  of  the  Greek  Testament, 
bears  testimony,  in  a  letter  written  to  Martin  Bogdan,  a  phy- 
sician in  Berne,  dated  January  14,  1664,  that  it  had  been 
brought  from  one  of  the  twenty-two  monasteries  in  Mount 
Athos,  which  the  Turks  never  destroyed,  but  allowed  to  con- 
tinue upon  the  payment  of  tribute.  Dr.  Woide  endeavors  to 
weaken  the  evidence  of  Muttis,  and  to  render  the  testimony 
of  the  elder  Wetstein  suspicious ;  but  Spohn  shows  that  the 
objections  of  Woide  are  ungrounded.  Allowing  their  reality, 
we  cannot  infer  that  Cyrillus  found  this  manuscript  in  Alexan- 
dria. Before  he  went  to  Alexandria,  he  spent  some  time  on 
Mount  Athos,  the  repository  and  manufactory  of  manuscripts 
of  the  New  Testament,  whence  a  great  number  has  been 
brought  into  the  west  of  Europe,  and  a  still  greater  number 
has  been  sent  to  Moscow.  It  is  therefore  probable,  indepen- 
dently of  the  evidence  of  Muttis,  that  Cyrillus  procured  it 
there  either  by  purchase  or  by  present,  took  it  with  him  to 
Alexandria,  and  brought  it  thence  on  his  return  to  Constan- 
tinople. 

The  antiquity  of  this  manuscript  has  also  been  the  subject 
of  controversy.     Grabe  and  Schulze  think  that  it  might  have 


456  THE  UNCIAL  CODICES. 

been  written  before  the  end  of  the  fourth  century,  which,  says 
Michaelis,  is  the  very  utmost  period  that  can  be  allowed,  be- 
cause it  contains  the  Epistles  of  Athanasius.  Oudin  places  it 
in  the  tenth  century.  Wetstein  refers  it  to  the  fifth,  and  sup- 
poses that  it  was  one  of  the  manuscripts  collected  at  Alex- 
andria in  615,  for  the  Syriac  version.  Semler  refers  it  to  the 
seventh  century.  Montfaucon  is  of  opinion  that  neither  the 
Codex  Alexandrinus,  nor  any  Greek  manuscript,  can  be  said 
with  great  probability  to  be  much  prior  to  the  sixth  century. 
Michaelis  apprehends  that  this  manuscript  was  written  after 
Arabic  was  become  the  native  language  of  the  Egyptians, 
that  is,  one,  or  rather  two  centuries  after  Alexandria  was 
taken  by  the  Saracens,  which  happened  in  the  year  640,  be- 
cause the  transcriber  frequently  confounds  M  and  B,  which  is 
often  done  in  the  Arabic ;  and  he  concludes  that  it  is  not  more 
ancient  than  the  eighth  century.  Woide,  after  a  great  display 
of  learning,  with  which  he  examines  the  evidence  for  the 
antiquity  of  the  Codex  Alexandrinus,  concludes  that  it  was 
written  between  the  middle  and  the  end  of  the  fourth  century. 
It  cannot  be  allowed  a  greater  antiquity,  because  it  has  not 
only  the  titXoi  or  Ke<f)aX.aia  majora,  but  the  K€<f>a\aia  minora, 
or  Ammonian  sections,  accompanied  with  the  references  to  the 
Canons  of  Eusebius.  Woide's  arguments  have  been  objected 
to  by  Spohn.  Some  of  the  principal  arguments  advanced  by 
those  who  refer  this  manuscript  to  the  fourth  or  fifth  centuries, 
are  the  following :  The  Epistles  of  Saint  Paul  are  not  divided 
into  chapters  like  the  Gospels,  though  this  division  took  place 
so  early  as  396,  when  to  each  chapter  was  prefixed  a  super- 
scription. The  Codex  Alexandrinus  has  the  Epistles  of  Clement 
of  Rome  ;  but  these  were  forbidden  to  be  read  in  the  churches 
by  the  Council  of  Laodicea,  in  364,  and  that  of  Carthage,  in 
419.  Hence  Schulze  has  inferred,  that  it  was  written  before 
the  year  364 ;  and  he  produces  a  new  argument  for  its  an- 
tiquity, deduced  from  the  last  of  the  fourteen  hymns  found  in 
it  after  the  psalms,  which  is  superscribed  vfjivo<;  €co0Lvo<i,  and  is 
called  the  grand  doxology ;  for  this  hymn  has  not  the  clause 
ayio^  0  ^eo9j  ayiof;  La')(ypo'i^  ayto<;  aOavaro^^  eXerjaov  ijiJui<;,  which 
was  used  between  the  years  434  and  446;  and  therefore  the 
manuscript  must  have  been  written  before  this  time.  Wetstein 
thinks  that  it  must  have  been  written  before  the  time  of 
Jerome,  because  the  Greek  text  of  this  manuscript  was  altered 
from  the  old  Italic. 

Dietelmaier,  who  has  more  recently  investigated  this  ques- 
tion, is  of  opinion  that  this  manuscript  was  written  towards 


THE  UNCIAL  CODICES.  457 

the  close  of  the  fourth,  or  early  in  the  fifth  century ;  and  this, 
which  is  the  most  probable  opinion,  is  adopted  by  Baber. 

The  value  of  the  Alexandrian  manuscript  has  been  differ- 
ently appreciated  by  different  writers.  Wetstein  is  no  great 
admirer  of  it,  nor  does  Michaelis  estimate  it  highly,  either  on 
account  of  its  internal  excellence  or  the  value  of  its  readings. 
It  must  be  conceded  that  it  is  far  below  the  rank  of  Codd.  B  and  ^. 

The  Alexandrian  manuscript  is  written  in  uncial  or  capital 
letters,  without  any  accents  or  marks  of  aspiration,  but  with  a 
few  abbreviations. 

A  fac-simile  of  the  Codex  Alexandrinus,  containing  the 
New  Testament,  was  published  at  London  in  1786,  in  folio, 
by  the  late  Dr.  Woide,  assistant  librarian  of  the  British  Museum, 
with  types  cast  for  the  purpose,  line  for  line,  without  intervals 
between  the  words,  precisely  as  in  the  original. 

Codex  Ephraemi,  C.  No.  9,  in  the  Imperial  Library  of 
Paris,  is  a  most  valuable  palimpsest  containing  portions  of  the 
Septuagint  version  of  the  Old  Testament  on  64  leaves  ;  and 
fragments  of  every  part  of  the  New  on  145  leaves,  amounting 
on  the  whole  to  less  than  two-thirds  of  the  volume. 

See  plates  on  following  page. 

This  manuscript  seems  to  have  been  brought  from  the  East 
by  Andrew  John  Lascar  [ti535],  a  learned  Greek  patronized  by 
Lorenzo  de'  Medici ;  it  once  belonged  to  Cardinal  Nicolas 
Ridolphi  of  that  family,  was  brought  into  France  by  Queen 
Catherine  de  Medici,  and  so  passed  into  the  Royal  Library  at 
Paris.  The  ancient  writing  is  barely  legible,  having  been 
almost  removed  about  the  twelfth  century  to  receive  some 
Greek  works  of  St.  Ephraem,  the  great  Syrian  Father  [299- 
378]  ;  a  chemical  preparation  applied  at  the  instance  of  Fleck 
in  1834,  though  it  revived  much  that  was  before  illegible,  has 
defaced  the  vellum  with  stains  of  various  colors,  from  green 
and  blue  to  black  and  brov/n.  The  older  writing  was  first 
noticed  by  Peter  Allix  nearly  two  centuries  ago ;  various 
readings  extracted  from  it  were  communicated  by  Boivin  to 
Kuster,  who  published  them  (under  the  Notation  of  Paris  9) 
in  his  edition  of  Mill's  N.  T.  171 1.  A  complete  collation  of 
the  New  Testament  was  first  made  by  Wetstein  in  1716,  then 
very  young,  for  Bentley's  projected  edition,  for  which  labor  (as 
he  records  the  fact  himself)  he  paid  Wetstein  ^50.  This  col- 
lation Wetstein  of  course  used  for  his  own  Greek  Testament 
of  175 1-2,  and  though  several  persons  subsequently  examined 
the  manuscript,  and  so  became  aware  that  more  might  be 
gathered    from   it,   it   was   not   until    1843   that   Tischendorf 


458 


THE  UNCIAL  CODICES. 


«^ 


?: 


THE  UNCIAL  CODICES.  459 

brought  out  at  Leipsic  his  full  and  noble  edition  of  the  New- 
Testament  portion;  the  Old  Testament  he  published  in  1845. 
Although  Tischendorf  complains  of  the  typographical  errors 
made  in  his  absence  in  the  former  of  these  two  volumes,  and 
has  corrected  them  in  the  other,  they  probably  comprise  by  far 
the  most  masterly  production  of  this  nature  up  to  that  date 
published ;  it  is  said  too  that  none  but  those  who  have  seen 
Codex  C,  can  appreciate  the  difficulty  of  deciphering  some 
parts  of  it.  In  shape.  Codex  C  is  about  the  size  of  Cod.  A,  but 
not  quite  so  tall ;  its  vellum  is  hardly  so  fine  as  that  of  Cod  A 
and  a  few  others,  yet  it  is  sufficiently  good.  In  this  copy  there  is 
but  one  column  in  a  page  which  contains  from  40  to  46  lines 
(usually  41),  the  characters  being  a  little  smaller  than  either  A 
or  B,  and  somewhat  more  elaborate.  The  uncial  writing  is 
continuous,  the  punctuation  of  Cod.  C,  like  that  of  A  and  B,  con- 
sisting only  of  a  single  point,  mostly  but  not  always  put  level 
with  the  top  of  the  preceding  letter.  Wherever  such  a  point 
was  employed,  a  space  of  one  letter  broad  was  usually  left 
vacant.  These  points  are  most  common  in  the  later  books  of 
the  N.  T.  Three  correctors  at  least  have  been  at  work  on  Cod. 
C,  greatly  to  the  perplexity  of  the  critical  collator:  they  are 
respectively  indicated  by  Tischendorf  as  C*,  C**,  C***.  The 
earliest  may  have  been  of  the  sixth  century;  the  second  per- 
haps of  the  ninth,  who  revised  such  portions  only  as  were 
adapted  to  ecclesiastical  use ;  he  inserted  many  accents,  the 
rough  breathing,  and  some  notes.  By  him,  or  by  the  third 
hand  (whose  changes  are  but  few),  small  crosses  were  inter- 
polated as  stops,  agreeably  to  the  fashion  of  their  times." 
(Scrivener  op.  cit.) 

Critics  refer  Codex  C.  to  the  fifth  century. 

"Cod.  Claromontanus,  D,  No.  107  of  the  Imperial 
Library  at  Paris,  is  a  Greek  Latin  copy  of  St.  Paul's  Epistles, 
one  of  the  most  ancient  and  important  in  existence.  Like  the 
Cod.  Ephraemi  in  the  same  Library  it  has  been  fortunate  in 
such  an  editor  as  Tischendorf,  who  published  it  in  1852  with 
complete  Prolegomena,  and  a  facsimile  traced  by  Tregelles. 
This  noble  volume  is  in  small  quarto,  written  on  533  leaves  of 
the  thinnest  and  finest  vellum.  The  Greek  and  Latin  are  both 
written  continuously,  but  in  a  stichometrical  form  ;  the  Greek 
as  in  Cod.  Bezae,  stands  of  the  left  or  first  page  of  the  opened 
book,  not  on  the  right,  as  in  the  Cod.  Laudianus.  Each 
page  has  but  one  column  of  about  21  lines,  so  that  in  this  copy, 
as  in  the  Codex  Bezae,  the  Greek  and  Latin  are  in  parallel 
lines,  but  on  separate  pages.     The  ink  has  much  faded,  or  gone 


460  THE   UNCIAL  CODICES. 

off  upon  the  opposite  page ;  otherwise  the  book  is  in  good 
condition.  We  reproduce  on  opposite  page  a  fac-simile  of 
Romans  VII.  4-7,  from  the  Greek  of  Codex  Claromontanus. 
The  leaves  162  and  163  of  the  Codex  are  palimpsest,  and  this 
plate  is  taken  from  that  portion.  The  plate  furnishes  a 
good  specimen  of  stichometry  and  palimpsest  documents. 
It  contains  all  St.  Paul's  Epistles  (the  Hebrews  after 
Philemon),  except  Rom.  I.  1-7;  27-30,  both  Greek  and 
Latin  ;  Rom.  I.  24-27  in  the  Latin  is  supplied  in  a  later  but 
very  old  hand,  as  also  is  I.  Cor.  XIV.  13-22  in  the  Greek.  The 
Latin  of  I.  Cor.  XIV.  8-18  ;  Hebr.  XIII.  21-23  is  lost.  The 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  has  been  erroneously  imputed  by 
some  to  a  later  scribe,  although  it  is  not  included  in  the  list  of 
the  sacred  books,  and  of  the  number  of  their  arixot  or  versus, 
which  stands  immediately  before  the  Hebrews  in  this  Codex ; 
but  the  same  list  overlooks  the  Epistle  to  the  Philippians, 
which  has  never  been  doubted  to  be  St.  Paul's :  in  this  man- 
uscript, however,  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians  precedes  that 
to  the  Philippians.  Our  earliest  notice  of  it  is  derived  from 
the  Preface  to  Beza's  3d  edition  of  the  N.  T.  (20  Feb.  1582) ; 
he  there  describes  it  as  of  equal  antiquity  with  his  copy  of  the 
Gospels  (D),  and  states  that  it  had  been  found  '  in  Claromon- 
tano  apud  Bellovacos  coenobio,'  at  Clermont  near  Beauvais. 
Although  Beza  sometimes,  through  inadvertence  calls  his 
Codex  of  the  Gospels  Claromontanus,  there  seems  no  reason 
for  disputing  with  Wetstein  the  correctness  of  his  account, 
though  it  throws  no  light  on  the  manuscript's  early  history. 
From  Beza  it  passed  into  the  possession  of  Claude  du  Puy ; 
Councillor  of  Paris,  probably  on  Beza's  death  [1605],  thence  to 
his  sons  Jacques  and  Pierre  du  Puy.  Before  the  death  of  Jacques 
(who  was  the  King's  Librarian)  in  1656,  it  had  been  bought  by 
Louis  XIV.  for  the  Royal  Library  at  Paris.  Beza  made  some, 
but  not  a  considerable  use  of  this  document.  In  Walton's  Poly- 
glott  were  inserted  2245  readings  sent  by  the  du  Puys  to  Usher 
{Mill,  N.T.  Proleg.  §  1284).  Wetstein  collated  it  twice  in  early 
life  (1715-6);  Tregelles  examined  it  in  1849,  ^"*^  compared  his 
results  with  the  then  unpublished  transcript  of  Tischendorf ; 
which  proved  on  its  appearance  (1852)  the  most  difficult,  as 
well  as  one  of  the  most  important,  of  his  critical  works ;  so 
hard  it  had  been  found  at  times  to  determine  satisfactorily  the 
original  readings  of  a  manuscript,  which  had  been  corrected  by 
nine  different  hands,  ancient  and  modern.  The  date  of  the 
codex  is  doubtless  the  sixth  century,  in  the  middle  or  towards 
the  end  of  it.     The  Latin   letters   b  and   d    are    the    latest 


n^mit  fu>Kiai 


I<Aiy  MeiC ft:®A MA  FIDO} ITerm>MO  M CD 
-AlATOVca>MATOCT"dyxV'-'  J '  -  '!■'  '■•  t ; '' 

e8C7;6r6Me'co4i(Y'MAC(3Ti*fC!i?.   '  i 
:rcuc5KMeKpcbfjert:peoHTf-        -m), 
-  I  NAKApr  i.od>opHcU>i^en^ru>dcuf'j/i  n 
U'rerXpliMhHcM  fMGAFK)  <  inijf/ 

TAr  FAOHMA'rArcbMAMAprrid)Mi 
rAAiAToyfiOMoyeMej'rerror)!  >  >i.'n  ^j' 
eMTOicMeAecm»m<cur/r        /!!(/ij|> 

e  KTTO  KA  ^1  lod)  0|>  >1cA  iT^cboA  HA^r€*v*^ '' '/ 

w  yw  ^i  A  e  KATu  j>r  riciw  Kf  ew 
AnoTdyNdMoyrn^y0iAMiAa\»v  ^t^ 

CMUJKATeiXOMeOA'M » '  

cu  creAoyAeVfiH  HM^ce*^is<?NoTsMTjf Jku 

KA I  oynAA^^prjri'  iiiTpAi^^  A  roe » '  i^  Jr.*  j 
'loy^Je^oVMe^i^'•         n^rf 

pMOMpC5MAjpTJAM^jr#>tft)K*or/ri>/f/ 

aaaatAmamAp  TANdYi^^Pisia)-|.-^:;i  jf  i !  i 

eiMHAiAMo'MJoy  ,  r.;»f  ^iy.n  a  iortr-c/ 


-^j 


THE  UNCIAL  CODICES.  461 

in    form,    and    are    much    like    those    in  the    Cod.    Bezae, 
which  in  many  points  Cod.  Claromontanus  strongly  resembles." 

Codex  D  of  the  Gospels  and  Acts,  called  Codex 
Bezae  GraecO-Latinus,  belongs  to  the  University  Library 
at  Cambridge.  It  was  presented  to  the  University  in  1581  by 
Theodore  Beza,  for  whom  and  his  master  Calvin,  the  heads  of 
that  learned  body  then  cherished  a  veneration  which  already 
boded  ill  for  the  peace  of  the  English  Church.  Between  the 
Gospels  and  the  Acts,  the  Catholic  Epistles  once  stood,  of 
which  only  a  few  verses  remain  in  the  Latin  version  (IIL  John 
V.  11-15),  followed  by  the  words  "  epistulae  Johanis  IH.  ex- 
plicit, incipit  actus  apostolorum,"  as  if  St.  Jude's  Epistle  were 
displaced  or  wanting.  There  are  not  a  few  hiatus,  both  in  the 
Greek  and  Latin  texts. 

Beza  related  to  the  University  of  Cambridge  in  1581,  that 
he  obtained  the  volume  in  1562  from  the  monastery  of  St. 
Irenaeus,  at  Lyons  ("  oriente  ibi  civili  bello  "),  where  it  had 
long  lain  buried  ("  postquam  ibi  in  pulvere  diu  jacuisset "). 
This  great  city,  it  must  be  remembered,  was  sacked  in  that 
very  year  by  the  infamous  Des  Adrets,  whom  it  suited  to 
espouse  for  a  while  the  cause  of  the  Huguenots ;  and  we  can 
hardly  doubt  that  someone  who  had  shared  in  the  plunder  of 
the  abbey  conveyed  this  portion  of  it  to  Beza,  whose  influence 
at  that  juncture  was  paramount  among  the  French  Reformed. 
Patrick  Young,  the  librarian  of  Charles  L,  who  first  collated 
Cod.  A,  and  published  from  it  the  Epistles  of  Clement  in  1633, 
had  also  the  honor  of  being  the  first  to  completely  examine 
Cod.  D.  An  unusually  full  collation  was  made  for  Walton's 
Polyglott  by  Usher,  who  devoted  to  these  studies  the  doleful 
leisure  of  his  latter  years.  But  a  manuscript  replete  as  this  is 
with  variations  from  the  sacred  text,jbeyond  all  other  example, 
could  be  adequately  represented  only  by  being  published  in 
full ;  a  design  entrusted  by  the  University  of  Cambridge  to 
Dr.  Thomas  Kipling,  afterwards  Dean  of  Peterborough,  whose 
"Codex  Theodori  Bezae  Cantabrigiensis,"  1793,  2  vol.  fol.  (in 
type  imitating  the  original  handwriting  much  more  closely 
than  in  Codices  A,  C,  and  the  rest),  is  believed  to  be  a  faithful 
transcript  of  the  text. 

The  Codex  Bezae  is  a  quarto  volume,  10  inches  high  by  8 
broad;  of  414  leaves  (whereof  11  are  more  or  less  mutilated, 
and  9  by  later  hands),  with  one  column  on  a  page,  the  Greek 
text  and  its  Latin  version  being  parallel,  the  Greek  on 
the  left,  or  verso  of  each  leaf,  and  the  Latin  on  the  right, 
opposite  to  it,  on  the  recto  of  the  next.     Notwithstanding  the 


462  THE  UNCIAL  CODICES. 

Alexandrine  forms  that  abound  in  it  more  than  in  any  other 
copy,  and  which  have  been  held  to  prove  the  Egyptian  origin 
of  Codd.  A,B.C,  the  fact  of  its  having  a  Latin  version  sufficiently 
attests  its  Western  origin.  The  vellum  is  not  quite  equal  in 
fineness  to  that  of  a  few  others.  There  are  thirty-three  lines 
in  every  page,  and  these  of  unequal  length,  as  this  manuscript 
is  arranged  in  crrCxot,  being  the  earliest  in  date  that  is  so.  The 
Latin  is  placed  in  the  same  line,  and  as  nearly  as  possible  in 
the  same  order,  as  the  corresponding  Greek. 

The  characters  are  of  the  same  size  as  in  C,  smaller  than  in 
A,  B,  but  betray  a  later  age  than  any  of  these,  although  the 
Latin,  as  well  as  the  Greek,  is  written  continuously,  excepting 
that  in  the  titles  and  subscriptions  of  the  several  books  (as  in 
Codd.  D,  H,  of  St.  Paul)  the  words  are  separated. 

The  following  judgment  has  been  passed  upon  the  Codex 
by  Westcott  and  Hort :  That  it  is  substantially  a  Western 
text  of  the  second  century,  with  certain  additions  of  the  fourth 
century :  That  notwithstanding  a  vast  number  of  errors,  it  is 
valuable  in  the  reconstruction  of  the  original  text:  And  that  it 
gives  a  more  faithful  representation  of  the  manner  in  which 
the  Gospel  and  Acts  were  read  in  the  third  century,  and, 
probably,  in  the  second,  than  any  other  existing  Greek 
Codex. 

Codex  Basiliensis  E  contains  the  four  Gospels,  excepting 
Luke  in.  4-15;  XXIV.  47-53,  and  was  written  about  the 
middle  of  the  eighth  century.  Three  leaves,  on  which  are 
Luke  I.  69— II.  4;  XII.  58— XIII.  12;  XV.  5-20,  are  in  a 
smaller  and  late  hand,  above  the  obliterated  fragments  of  a 
homily  as  old  as  the  main  body  of  the  manuscript.  This  copy 
is  one  of  the  best  of  the  second-rate  uncials,  and  might  well 
have  been  published  at  length.  It  was  given  to  a  religious 
house  in  Basle  by  Cardinal  John  de  Ragusio,  who  was  sent  on 
a  mission  to  the  Greeks  by  the  Council  of  Basle  (143 1),  and 
probably  brought  it  from  Constantinople.  Erasmus  overlooked 
it  for  later  books,  when  preparing  his  Greek  Testament  at 
Basle  ;  indeed,  it  was  not  brought  into  the  Public  Library 
there  before  1559.  A  collation  was  sent  to  Mill  by  John 
Battier,  Greek  professor  at  Basle.  Mill  named  it  B.  i,  and 
truly  declared  it  to  be  "probatse  fidei  et  bonae  notae."  Bengel 
(who  obtained  a  few  extracts  from  it)  calls  it  Basil,  a,  but  its 
first  real  collator  was  Wetstein,  whose  native  town  it  adorns. 
Since  his  time,  Tischendorf  in  1843,  Professor  Miiller  of 
Basle  and  Tregelles  in  1846,  have  independently  collated  it 
throughout. 


THE   UNCIAL  CODICES.  463 

Codex  Boreeli  F,  now  in  the  Public  Library  at  Utrecht, 
once  belonged  to  John  Boreel  [d.  1629],  Dutch  ambassador  at 
the  court  of  King  James  I.  Wetstein  obtained  some  readings 
from  it  in  1730,  as  far  as  Luke  XL,  but  stated  that  he  knew 
not  where  it  then  was.  In  1830,  Professor  Heringa  of  Utrecht 
discovered  it  in  private  hands  at  Arnheim,  and  procured  it  for 
his  University  Library,  where,  in  1850,  Tregelles  found  it, 
though  with  some  dififilculty,  the  leaves  being  torn  and  all 
loose  in  a  box.  He  made  a  facsimile  of  it.  Tischendorf  had 
looked  through  it  in  1841.  In  1843,  after  Heringa's  death,  H.  E. 
Vinke  published  that  scholar's  Disputatio  de  Codice  Boreeliano, 
which  includes  a  full  and  exact  collation  of  the  text.  It  con- 
tains the  Four  Gospels,  with  many  defects,  some  of  which 
have  been  caused  since  the  collation  was  made  which  Wetstein 
published ;  hence  the  Codex  must  still  sometimes  be  cited  on 
his  authority  as  F"'.  In  fact,  there  are  but  204  leaves  and  a 
few  fragments  remaining,  written  with  two  columns  of  about 
19  lines  each  on  a  page,  in  a  tall,  oblong,  upright  form.  It  is 
referred  by  Tischendorf  to  the  ninth,  by  Tregelles  to  the  tenth 
century.  In  St.  Luke  there  are  no  less  than  24  gaps.  In 
Wetstein's  collation  it  began  Matth.  VII.  6,  but  now  IX.  i. 
Other  hiatus  are  Matth.  XII.  1-44;  XIII.  55— XIV.  9;  XV. 
20-31  ;  XX.  18— XXI.  5  ;  Mark  I.  43— II.  8  ;  II.  23— III.  5  ; 
XL  6-26 ;  XIV.  54— XV.  5  ;  XV.  39— XVI.  19  ;  John  III. 
5-14  ;  IV.  23-38  ;  V.  18-38  ;  VI.  39-63  ;  VII.  28— VIII.  10  ;  X. 
32— XI,  3  ;  XL  40— XII.  3  ;  XII.  14-25  ;  it  ends  John  XIII.  34. 

Codex  Coislin.  F*  i  is  that  great  copy  of  the  Septuagint 
Octateuch,  the  glory  of  the  Coislin  Library,  first  made  known 
by  Montfaucon  (Biblioth.  Coislin.  171 5),  and  illustrated  by  a 
facsimile  in  Silvestre's  Pal6ogr.  Univ.  No.  65.  It  contains 
227  leaves  in  two  columns,  13  inches  by  9;  the  fine,  massive 
uncials  of  the  sixth  or  seventh  century  are  much  like  Cod.  A's 
in  general  appearance.  In  the  margin  prima  manu  Wetstein 
found  Acts  IX.  24,  25,  and  so  inserted  this  as  Cod.  F  in  his 
list  of  MSS.  of  the  Acts.  In  1842  Tischendorf  observed  19 
other  passages  of  the  New  Testament,  which  he  published  in 
his  Monumenta  sacra  inedita  (p.  400,  &c.)  with  a  facsimile. 
The  texts  are  Matth.  V.  48  ;  XII.  48  ;  XXVII.  25  ;  Luke  I. 
42 ;  II.  24  ;  XXIII.  21  ;  John  V.  35  ;  VI.  53,  55  ;  Acts  IV.  33, 
34;  X.  13,  15;  XXII.  22;  I.  Cor.  VII.  39;  XL  29;  II.  Cor. 
III.  13;  IX.  7;  XI.  33;  Gal.  IV.  21,  22;  Col.  II.  16,  17;  Hebr. 
X.  26. 

Cod.  Harleian.  G,  5684,  or  Wolfii  A,  and  Codex  H, 
called  Cod.  Wolfii  B.     These  two  copies  were  brought  from 


464  THE  UNCIAL  CODICES. 

the  East  by  Andrew  Erasmus  Seidel.  They  were  purchased  by 
La  Croze,andbyhimpresented  to  J. C.Wolff,  who  published  loose 
extracts  from  them  both  in  his  Anecdola  Grcsca  (Vol.  III.  1723), 
and  actually  mutilated  them  in  172 1  in  order  to  send  pieces  to 
Bentley,  among  whose  papers,  in  Trinity  College  Library 
(B.  XVII.  20),  Tregelles  found  the  fragments  in  1845  {Account 
of  the  Printed  Text,  p.  160).  Subsequently  Cod.  G  came  with 
the  rest  of  the  Harleian  collection  into  the  British  Museum  ; 
Cod.  H,  which  had  long  been  missing,  was  brought  to  light  in 
the  Public  Library  of  Hamburgh,  through  Petersen  the  librarian, 
in  1838.  Codd.  G,  H,  have  now  been  thoroughly  collated,  both 
by  Tischendorf  and  Tregelles.  Cod.  G  appears  to  be  of  the 
tenth,  Cod.  H,  of  the  ninth  century.  The  latter  is  of 
higher  critical  value.  Besides  the  mutilated  fragments  at 
Trinity  College  (Math.  V.  29-31;  39-43  of  Cod.  G;  Luke  I. 
3-6;  13-15  of  Cod.  H),  many  parts  of  both  have  perished,  viz: 
in  Cod.  G,  372  verses;  Matth.  I.  i— VI.  6;  VII.  25— VIII.  9; 

VIII.  23— IX.  2  ;  XXVIII.  18— Mark  I.  13  ;  XIV.  19-25  ;  Luke 
I.  1-13;  V.  4— VII.  3  ;  VIII.  46— IX.  5  ;  XIL  27-51;  XXIV. 
41-53;  John  XVIII.  5-19;  XIX.  4-27  (of  which  one  later 
hand  supplies  Matth.  XXVIII.  18— Mark  I.  8;  John  XVIII. 
5-19;  another  Luke  XII.  27-51);  in  Cod.  H,  679  verses; 
Matth.  I.  I— XV.  30;  XXV.  33— XXVI.  3  ;  Mark  I.  32— II.  4; 
XV.  44— XVI.  14;  Luke  V.  18-32  ;  VI.  8-22  ;  X.  2-19;  John 

IX.  30— X.  25;  XVIII.  2-18;  XX.  12-25. 

Codex  I,  Cod.  Tischendorf.  II.  at  St.  Petersburg,  con- 
sists of  palimpsest  fragments  found  by  Tischendorf  in  1853 
"  in  the  dust  of  an  Eastern  library,"  and  published  in  his  new 
series  of  Monumenta  sacra,  Vol.  I.  1855.  On  twenty-eight 
vellum  leaves  (eight  of  them  on  four  double  leaves),  Georgian 
writing  is  above  the  partially  obliterated  Greek,  which  is  for 
the  most  part  very  hard  to  read.  They  compose  fragments  of 
no  less  than  seven  different  manuscripts  ;  the  first  two,  of  the 
fifth  century,  are  as  old  as  Codd.  A,  C,  (the  first  having  scarcely 
any  capital  letters,  and  those  very  slightly  larger  than  the  rest)  ; 
the  third  fragment  seems  of  the  sixth  century,  the  fourth 
scarcely  less  ancient.  The  fifth  fragment,  containing  portions 
of  the  Acts  and  St.  Paul's  Epistles  (I.  Cor.  XV.  53  ;  XVI.  9 ; 
Tit.  I.  1-13  ;  Acts  XXVIII.  8-17),  is  as  old  as  the  third,  if  not 
as  the  first.  The  sixth  and  seventh  fragments  are  of  the 
seventh  century,  viz.  {Frag.  5,  of  two  leaves)  Acts  II.  6-17; 
XXVI.  7-t8  ;  {Frag.  7,  of  one  leaf)  Acts  XIII.  39-46.  In  all 
seven  are  255  verses.  All  except  Frag.  6  are  in  two  columns, 
of  from  twenty-nine  to  eighteen  lines  each,  and  unaccentuated. 


THE   UNCIAL  CODICES.  465 

Frag.  6  has  but  one  column  on  a  page,  with  some  accents. 
The  first  five  fragments,  so  far  as  they  extend,  must  be  placed 
in  the  first  rank  as  critical  authorities.  Tischendorf  gives  us 
six  facsimiles  of  them  in  the  Monumenta  sacra,  a  seventh  in 
Anecdota  sacra  et  prof  ana,  1855- 

Cod.  Cyprius  K,  or  No.  63  of  the  Imperial  Library  at 
Paris,  shares  only  with  Codd.  M,  S,  U,  the  advantage  of  being  a 
complete  uncial  copy  of  the  Four  Gospels.  It  was  brought 
into  the  Colbert  Library  from  Cyprus  in  1673.  Mill  inserted 
its  readings  from  Simon.  It  was  re-examined  by  Scholz.  The 
independent  collations  of  Tischendorf  and  Tregelles  have  now 
done  all  that  can  be  needed  for  this  copy.  It  is  an  oblong 
4to.,  in  compressed  uncials,  of  about  the  middle  of  the  ninth 
century,  having  one  column  of  about  twenty-one  lines  on  each 
page,  but  the  handwriting  is  irregular,  and  varies  much  in  size. 

Cod.  Regius  L,  No.  62  in  the  Imperial  Library  at  Paris, 
is  by  far  the  most  remarkable  document  of  its  age  and  class. 
It  contains  the  Four  Gospels,  except  the  following  passages : 
Matth.  IV.  22— V.  14  ;  XXVIII.  17-20  ;  Mark  X.  16-30  ;  XV. 
2-20;  John  XXI.  15-25.  It  was  written  about  the  eighth 
century  and  consists  of  257  leaves  4to.,  of  thick  vellum,  nearly 
six  and  a  half  inches  square,  with  two  columns  of  twenty-five 
lines  each  on  a  page,  regularly  marked,  as  we  so  often  see, 
by  the  stylus  and  ruler.  Wetstein  collated  Cod.  L  but  loosely; 
Griesbach,  who  set  a  very  high  value  on  it,  studied  it  with 
peculiar  care  ;  Tischendorf  published  it  in  full  in  his  Monu- 
menta sacra  inedita,  1S36. 

Cod.  Campianus  M,  No.  48  in  the  Imperial  Library  at 
Paris,  contains  the  Four  Gospels  complete  in  a  small  4to.  form, 
written  in  very  elegant  and  minute  uncials  of  the  end  of  the 
ninth  century,  with  two  columns  of  twenty-four  lines  each  on 
a  page.  It  has  breathings,  accents  pretty  fairly  given,  and  a 
musical  notation  in  red,  so  frequent  in  Church  manuscripts  of 
the  age.     Its  readings  are  very  good. 

Codex  Purpureus  N.  Only  twelve  leaves  of  this  beau- 
tiful copy  remain,  and  its  former  possessor  must  have  divided 
them  in  order  to  obtain  a  better  price  from  three  purchasers 
than  from  one  ;  four  leaves  being  now  in  the  British  Museum 
(Cotton  C.  XV.),  six  in  the  Vatican  (No.  3785),  two  at  Vienna 
(Lambec.  2).  These  latter  two  are  found  at  the  end  of  a  frag- 
ment of  Genesis  in  a  different  hand. 

The  London  fragments  (Matth.  XXVI.  57-65;  XXVII. 
26-34;  John  XIV.  2-10;  XV.  15-22)  were  collated  by  Wet- 
stein on  his  first  visit  to  England  in  171 5,  and  marked  in  his 

DD 


466  THE  UNCIAL  CODICES. 

Greek  Testament  by  the  letter  J.  Scrivener  transcribed  them 
in  1845,  ^^d  announced  that  they  contained  fifty-seven  various 
readings,  of  which  Wetstein  had  given  but  five.  The  Vienna 
fragment  (Luke  XXIV.  13-21,  39-49)  had  long  been  known 
by  the  descriptions  of  Lambeccius ;  Wetstein  had  called  it  N  ; 
Treschow,  in  1773,  and  Alter,  in  1787,  had  given  imperfect 
collations  of  it.  Scholz  first  noticed  the  Vatican  leaves  (Matth. 
XIX.  6-13  ;  XX.  6-22  ;  XX.  29— XXI.  19),  denoted  them  by 
r,  and  used  some  readings  extracted  by  Gaetano  Marini.  It 
was  reserved  ior  Tischendori  {Monumenta  sacra  inedita,  1846) 
to  publish  them  all  in  full,  and  to  determine  by  actual  inspec- 
tion that  they  were  portions  of  the  same  manuscript,  of  the 
date  of  about  the  end  of  the  sixth  century.  This  book  is 
written  on  the  thinnest  vellum,  dyed  purple,  and  the  silver 
letters  (which  have  turned  quite  black)  were  impressed  in  some 
way  on  it,  but  are  too  varied  in  shape  and  in  size,  to  admit  the 
supposition  of  moveable  type  being  used,  as  some  have 
thought  to  be  the  case  in  the  Codex  Argenteus  of  the  Gothic 
Gospels.  The  abridgements  @C,  XC,  &c.,  are  in  gold,  and 
some  changes  have  been  made  by  an  ancient  second  hand. 

Codex  P.  Guelpherbytanus  A  and  )        These   are   two 

Codex  Q B.  f  palimpsests,  discov- 
ered by  F.  A.  Knittel,  Archdeacon  of  Wolfenbiittel,  in  the 
Ducal  Library  of  that  city,  which  (together  with  some  frag- 
ments Ulphilas'  Gothic  version)  lie  under  the  more  modern 
writings  of  Isidore  of  Seville.  He  published  the  whole  in 
1762,  so  far,  at  least,  as  he  could  read  them,  though  Tregelles 
believed  more  might  be  deciphered,  and  Tischendorf,  with  his 
unconquerable  energy,  re-edited  the  Greek  portion  in  Vol.  III. 
of  his  Monumenta  sacra  inedita  (i860).  Codex  P  contains,  on 
43  leaves,  3 1  fragments  of  486  verses,  taken  from  all  the  four 
Evangelists;  Codex  Q,  on  13  leaves,  12  fragments  of  235  verses 
from  Luke  and  John ;  but  all  can  be  traced  only  with  great 
difficulty.  A  few  portions,  once  written  in  vermillion,  have 
quite  departed,  but  Tischendorf  has  made  material  additions 
to  Knittel's  labors,  both  in  extent  and  accuracy.  He  assigns 
P  to  the  sixth,  Q  to  the  fifth  century. 

Codex  Vaticanus  S.,  354,  contains  the  four  Gospels  entire, 
and  is  the  earliest  dated  manuscript  of  the  Greek  Testament. 
This  is  a  folio  of  234  leaves,  written  in  large  oblong  or  com- 
pressed uncials.  Its  subscription  affirms  that  it  was  written 
in  949. 

Codex  Borgianus  T.  i,  now  in  the  Propaganda  at  Rome^ 
contains   13  or  more  4to  leaves  of  Luke  and  John,  with  a 


THE   UNCIAL  CODICES.  467 

Thebaic  or  Sahidic  version  at  their  side,  but  on  the  opposite 
and  left  page.  Each  page  consists  of  two  columns  ;  a  single 
point  indicates  a  break  in  the  sense,  but  there  are  no  other 
divisions.  The  fragment  contains  Luke  XXII.  20 — XXIII. 
20;  John  VI.  28—67;  VII.  6— VIII.  32.  Giorgi  refers  it  to 
the  fourth  century ;  Tischendorf,  to  the  fifth. 

Codex  Nanianus  U.  i,  so  called  from  a  former  possessor, 
is  now  in  the  Library  of  St.  Mark,  Venice.  It  contains  the 
four  Gospels  entire,  carefully  and  luxuriously  written  in  two 
columns  of  21  lines  each  on  the  4to  page.  Its  date  is  not  before 
the  tenth  century,  although  the  "letters  are  in  general  an  imita- 
tion of  those  used  before  the  introduction  of  compressed 
uncials  ;  but  they  do  not  belong  to  the  age  when  full  and 
round  writing  was  customary  or  natural,  so  that  the  stiffness 
and  want  of  ease  is  manifest."  Tischendorf  in  1843  ^"<^  Tre- 
gelles  in  1846  collated  Cod.  U,  thoroughly  and  independently, 
and  compared  their  work  at  Leipsic  for  the  purpose  of  mutual 
correction. 

Codex  Mosquensis  V,  of  the  Holy  Synod,  is  known  al- 
most exclusively  from  Matthaei's  Greek  Testament :  he  states, 
no  doubt  most  truly,  that  he  collated  it  "  bis  diligentissim^" 
and  gives  a  facsimile  of  it,  assigning  it  to  the  eighth  century. 
Judging  from  Matthaei's  plate,  it  is  hard  to  say  why  others 
have  dated  it  in  the  ninth. 

Codex  Monacensis  X  in  the  University  Library  at 
Munich  is  a  valuable  folio  manuscript  of  the  end  of  the  ninth 
or  early  in  the  tenth  century,  containing  the  Four  Gospels 
with  serious  defects,  and  a  commentary  (chiefly  from  Chrysos- 
tom)  surrounding  and  interspersed  with  the  text  of  all  but  St. 
Mark,  in  early  cursive  letters,  not  unlike  (in  Tischendorf 's  judg- 
ment) the  celebrated  Oxford  Plato  dated  895.  The  very  ele- 
gant uncials  of  Cod.  X  "  are  small  and  upright ;  though  some 
of  them  are  compressed,  they  seem  as  if  they  were  partial 
imitations  of  those  used  in  very  early  copies." 

Codex  Barberini  Y,  225  at  Rome  (in  the  Library  founded 
by  Cardinal  Barberini  in  the  17th  century)  contains  on  six 
large  leaves  the  137  verses  John  XVI.  3 — XIX.  41,  of  about 
the  eighth  century.  Tischendorf  obtained  access  to  it  in  1843 
for  a  few  hours,  after  some  difficulty  with  the  Prince  Barberini, 
and  published  it  in  his  first  instalment  of  Monumenta  sacra 
inedita,  1846. 

Codex  Dublinensis  rescriptus,  Z,  one  of  the  chief 
palimpsests  extant,  contains  290  verses  of  St.  Matthew's 
Gospel  in  22  fragments.      It  was  discovered  in  1787  by  Dr. 


468  THE   UNCIAL  CODICES. 

John  Barrett,  Senior  Fellow  of  Trinity  College,  Dublin,  under 
some  cursive  writing  of  the  loth  century  or  later,  consisting  of 
Chrysostom  de  Sacerdotio,  extracts  from  Epiphanius,  &c.  In 
the  same  volume  are  portions  of  Isaiah  and  of  Gregory  Nazian- 
zen,  in  erased  uncial  letters,  but  not  so  ancient  as  the  frag- 
ment of  St,  Matthew,  All  the  32  leaves  of  this  Gospel  that 
remain  were  engraved  in  copper-plate  /ac-stmt/e  at  the  expense 
of  Trinity  College  and  published  by  Barrett  in  1801, 
furnished  with  Prolegomena,  and  the  contents  of  each  fac- 
simile  plate  in  modern  Greek  characters,  on  the  opposite 
page. 

Codex  r,  Tischendorfian  IV.  was  brought  by  Tischen- 
dorf  from  an  "  eastern  monastery "  (he  usually  describes  the 
locality  of  his  manuscripts  in  general  terms),  and  was  bought 
for  the  Bodleian  Library  in  1855.  It  consists  of  158 
leaves  in  large  quarto,  with  one  column  (of  24  not  very 
straight  or  regular  lines)  on  a  page,  in  uncials  of  the 
ninth  century,  leaning  slightly  back,  but  otherwise  much  re- 
sembling Cod.  K.  in  style.  St.  Luke's  Gospel  is  complete ; 
the  last  ten  leaves  are  hurt  by  damp,  though  still  legible.  In 
St.  Mark,  only  105  verses  are  wanting  (III.  3$ — VI.  20) ;  about 
531  verses  of  the  other  Gospels  survive.  Tischendorf,  and 
Tregelles  by  his  leave,  have  independently  collated  this  copy, 
of  which  Tischendorf  gives  a  facsimile  in  his  Anecdota  sacra 
et  prof  ana,  1855. 

Codex  Sangallensis  A.  was  first  inspected  by  Gerbert 
(1773),  named  by  Scholz  (N.  T.  1830),  and  made  fully  known 
to  us  by  the  admirable  edition  in  lithographed  facsimile  of 
every  page,  by  H.  Ch.  M.  Rettig,  published  at  Zurich,  1836, 
with  copious  and  satisfactory  Prolegomena.  It  is  preserved 
and  was  probably  transcribed  a  thousand  years  since  in  the 
great  monastery  of  St.  Gall  in  the  North-east  of  Switzerland. 
It  is  rudely  written  on  197  leaves  of  coarse  vellum  4to,  10 
inches  by  8^  in  size,  with  from  20  to  26  (usually  21)  lines  on 
each  page,  in  a  very  peculiar  hand,  with  an  interlinear  Latin 
version.  It  contains  the  four  Gospels  complete  except  John 
XIX.  17 — 25.  Rettig  thinks  he  has  traced  several  different 
scribes  and  inks  employed  on  it,  which  might  happen  easily 
enough  in  the  Scriptorium  of  a  monastery ;  but,  if  so,  their 
style  of  writing  is  very  nearly  the  same,  and  they,  doubtless, 
copied  from  the  same  archetype,  about  the  same  time.  He 
has  produced  more  convincing  arguments  to  show  that  Cod.  A 
is  part  of  the  same  book  as  the  Codex  Boernerianus,  G  of  St. 
Paul's  Epistles.  Not  only  do  they  exactly  resemble  each  other 


THE   UNCIAL   CODICES.  469 

in  theirwhole  arrangement  and  appearance,but  marginal  notes  by 
the  first  hand  are  found  in  each,  of  precisely  the  same  character. 

Codex  ©  Tischendorf  I.  was  brought  from  the  East  by 
Tischendorf  in  1845,  published  by  him  in  his  Monumenta  sacra 
inedit.  1846,  and  deposited  in  the  University  Library  at 
Leipsic.  It  consists  of  but  four  leaves  (all  imperfect)  4to,  of 
very  thin  vellum,  almost  too  brittle  to  be  touched,  so  that  each 
leaf  is  kept  separately  in  glass.  It  contains  about  40  verses  ; 
viz.,  Matth.  XIII.  46 — 55  (in  mere  shreds);  and  XIV.  4 — 14. 

Codex  Zacynthius  H  is  a  palimpsest  in  the  Library  of 
the  British  and  Foreign  Bible  Society  in  London,  which,  under 
an  Evangelistarium  written  on  coarse  vellum  in  or  about  the 
1 3th  century,  contains  large  portions  of  St.  Luke,  down  to  Chap. 
XI.  33,  in  full  well-formed  uncials,  but  surrounded  by,  and 
often  interwoven  with  large  extracts  from  the  Fathers,  in  a 
hand  so  cramped  and,  as  regards  the  round  letters,  so  oblong, 
that  it  cannot  be  earlier  than  the  eighth  century.  This  volume, 
which  once  belonged  to  "  II  Principe  Comuto,  Zante,"  was  pre- 
sented to  the  Bible  Society  in  182 1  by  General  Macaulay,  who 
brought  it  from  Zante. 

Codex  Laudianus  E,  35  is  one  of  the  most  precious  trea- 
sures preserved  in  the  Bodleian  at  Oxford.  It  is  a  Latin- 
Greek  copy,  with  two  columns  on  a  page,  the  Latin  version 
holding  the  post  of  honor  on  the  left.  It  is  written  in  very 
short  ctCxol,  consisting  of  from  one  to  three  words  each,  the 
Latin  words  always  standing  opposite  to  the  corresponding 
Greek.  This  peculiar  arrangement  points  decisively  to  the 
West  of  Europe  as  its  country,  notwithstanding  the  abundance 
of  Alexandrian  forms  has  led  some  to  refer  it  to  Egypt.  The 
very  large,  bold,  thick,  rude  uncials,  without  break  in  the  words 
or  accents,  lead  us  up  to  the  end  of  the  sixth  century  as  its 
date.  The  Latin  is  not  of  Jerome's  or  the  Vulgate  version; 
but  is  made  to  correspond  closely  with  the  Greek,  even  in  its 
interpolations  and  rarest  various  readings.  This  manuscript 
contains  only  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and  exhibits  a  remark- 
able modification  of  the  text.  That  the  book  was  once  in  Sar- 
dinia, appears  from  an  edict  of  Flavius  Pancratius,  crvv  Oeeo 
airo  €7rapx<i>v  8ov^  (rapBiviwi,  appended  (as  also  is  the  Apostles' 
Creed  in  Latin,  and  some  other  matter)  in  a  later 
hand.  This  manuscript,  with  many  others,  was  presented  to 
the  University  of  Oxford  in  the  year  1636,  by  its  Chancellor, 
Laud.  Thomas  Hearne,  the  celebrated  antiquary,  published 
a  full  edition  of  it  in  171 5,  which  is  now  very  scarce,  and  is 
known  to  be  far  from  accurate. 


470  THE   UNCIAL   CODICES. 

Codex  Mutinensis  H,  196,  of  the  Acts,  in  the  Grand 
Ducal  Library  at  Modena,  is  an  uncial  copy  of  about  the  ninth 
century,  defective  in  Act.  I.  i — V.  28;  IX.  39 — X.  19;  XIII. 
36 — XIV.  3  (all  supplied  by  a  recent  hand  of  the  fifteenth  cen- 
tury); and  in  XXVII.  4 — XXVIII.  31  (supplied  in  uncials  of 
about  the  eleventh  century).  The  Epistles  are  in  cursive 
letters  of  the  twelfth  century,  indicated  in  the  Catholic  Epistles 
by  h,  in  the  Pauline  by  179.  Scholz  first  collated  it  ;  then 
Tischendorf  in  1843,  and  Tregelles  in  1846.  They  afterwards 
compared  their  collations  for  mutual  correction. 

Codex  Sangermanensis  E,  is  another  Greek-Latin 
manuscript,  and  takes  its  name  from  the  Abbey  of  St.  Germain 
des  Pr^s  near  Paris.  Towards  the  end  of  the  last  century  the 
Abbey  (which  at  the  Revolution  had  been  turned  into  a  salt- 
petre manufactory)  was  burnt  down,  and  many  of  its  books 
lost.  In  1895  Matthaei  found  this  copy,  as  might  have  been 
anticipated,  at  St.  Petersburg,  where  it  is  now  deposited.  The 
volume  is  a  large  4to,  the  Latin  and  Greek  in  parallel  columns 
on  the  same  page,  the  Greek  standing  to  the  left.  Its  uncials 
are  coarse,  large  and  thick,  not  unlike  those  in  Codex  E  of  the 
Acts,  but  of  later  shape,  with  breathings  and  accents  primd 
tnanu,  of  about  the  tenth  century.  Mill  obtained  some  ex- 
tracts from  it,  and  noted  its  obvious  connection  with  Codex 
Claromontanus.  Wetstein  thoroughly  collated  it;  and  not 
only  he  but  Sabatier  and  Griesbach  perceived  that  it  was,  at 
least  in  the  Greek,  nothing  better  than  a  mere  transcript  of 
Codex  Claromontanus,  made  by  some  ignorant  person  about 
the  loth  century. 

Codex  Augiensis  F,  in  the  Library  of  Trinity  College, 
Cambridge  (B,  17.  i),  is  another  Greek-Latin  manuscript  on 
136  leaves  of  good  vellum  4to  (the  signatures  proving  that 
seven  more  are  lost),  9  inches  by  7^,  with  the  two  languages 
in  parallel  columns  of  28  lines  on  each  page,  the  Greek  being 
always  inside,  the  Latin  next  the  edge  of  the  book.  It  is 
called  from  the  monastery  of  Augia  Dives  or  Major  (Reichenau, 
or  rich  meadow),  on  a  fertile  island  in  the  lower  part  of  Lake 
Constance,  to  which  it  long  appertained,  and  where  it  may 
even  have  been  written,  a  thousand  years  since. 

Codex  Boernerianus  G,  so  called  from  a  former  pos- 
sessor, now  in  the  Royal  Library  at  Dresden.  In  the  i6th 
century  it  belonged  to  Paul  Junius  of  Leyden  :  it  was  bought 
at  the  book-sale  of  Peter  Francius,  Professor  at  Amsterdam, 
in  1705,  by  C.  F.  Boerner,  a  Professor  at  Leipsic,  who  lent  it 
to  Kuster  to  enrich  his  edition  of  Mill  (171 1),  and  subsequently 


THE  UNCIAL  CODICES.  471 

to  Bentley.  The  latter  so  earnestly  wished  to  purchase  it  as  a 
companion  to  Cod.  F,  that  though  he  received  it  in  17 19,  it 
could  not  be  recovered  from  him  for  five  years,  during  which 
period  he  was  constantly  offering  high  sums  for  it.  A  copy,  but 
not  in  Bentley 's  hand,  had  been  already  made  (Trin.Coll.  B.  17.  2). 

Cod.  G  was  published  in  full  by  Matthaei  in  1791,  in  common 
type,  with  two  facsimile  pages ;  his  edition  is  believed  to  be 
very  accurate;  Anger,  Tischendorf,  Tregelles,  Bottiger  and 
others  who  have  examined  it  have  only  expressly  indicated 
two  errors.  Rettig  has  abundantly  proved  that,  as  it  is  exactly 
of  the  same  size,  so  it  once  formed  part  of  the  same  volume 
with  Cod.  A :  they  must  date  towards  the  end  of  the  ninth 
century,  and  may  very  possibly  have  been  written  in  the 
monastery  of  St.  Gall  (where  A  still  remains)  by  some  of  the 
Irish  monks  who  flocked  to  those  parts.  That  Cod.  G  has 
been  in  such  hands  appears  from  some  very  curious  Irish  lines 
at  the  foot  of  one  of  Matthaei's  plates,  which  after  having  long 
perplexed  learned  men,  have  recently  been  translated  by 
Reeves. 

Codex  Coislin.  H.,  202  is  a  very  precious  fragment  of  14 
leaves,  12  of  which  are  in  the  Imperial  Library  at  Paris,  two 
having  found  their  way  to  St.  Petersburg  after  the  hasty  re- 
moval of  the  manuscripts  from  the  Abbey  of  St.  Germain  de 
Pres,  when  Cod.  E  disappeared.  The  leaves  at  Paris  contain 
I.  Cor.  X.  22—29;  XI.  9—16;  I.  Tim.  III.  7—13  ;  Tit.  I.  i— 
3;I.  15— II.  5;  III.  13— 15;  Hebr.  II.  II— 16;  III.  13— 18; 
IV.  12 — 15  ;  those  at  St.  Petersburg,  Gal.  I.  4 — 10;  II.  9 — 14; 
in  all  56  verses.  They  are  in  4to,  with  large  square  uncials  of 
about  16  lines  on  a  page,  and  date  from  the  6th  century. 
Breathings  and  accents  are  added  by  a  later  hand,  which  re- 
touched this  copy.  These  leaves,  which  comprise  one  of  our 
best  authorities  for  stichometrical  writing,  were  used  in  1218 
to  bind  another  book  on  Mount  Athos,  and  thence  came  into 
the  library  of  Coislin,  Bishop  of  Metz. 

Codex  Ruber  M  is  peculiar  for  the  beautifully  bright  red 
color  of  the  ink,  the  elegance  of  the  small  uncial  characters, 
and  the  excellency  and  critical  value  of  the  text.  Two  folio 
leaves  containing  Hebr.  I.  i — IV.  3  ;  XII.  20 — XIII.  25,  once 
belonged  to  UfTenbach,  then  to  J.  C.  Wolff,  who  bequeathed 
them  to  the  Public  Library  (Johanneum)  of  Hamburg.  To 
the  same  manuscript  belong  fragments  of  two  leaves  used  in 
binding  Cod.  Harleian.  5613  in  the  British  Museum,  and  seen 
at  once  by  Griesbach,  who  first  collated  them,  to  be  portions 
of   the  Hamburg  fragment.     Each  page  in  both  contains  two 


472         THE  COMPLUTENSIAN  POLYGLOTT. 

columns.  There  are  forty-five  lines  on  each  page  in  the  Ham- 
burg fragment ;  thirty-eight  in  the  London  leaves.  The  latter 
comprise  I.  Cor.  XV.  52— II.  Cor.  I.  15  ;  II.  Cor.  X.  13— XII. 
5  ;  reckoning  both  fragments,  there  are  196  verses  in  all. 
Henke,  in  1800,  edited  the  Hamburg  portion  ;  Tregelles  collat- 
ed it  twice,  and  Tischendorf,  in  1855,  published  the  text  of 
both  in  full  in  his  Anecdota  Sacra  et  Prof  ana. 

CoDEX  Vaticanus  B,  2066,  OF  THE  APOCALYPSE,  is  an 
uncial  copy  of  about  the  beginning  of  the  eighth  century,  and 
the  volume  also  contains,  in  the  same  hand,  homilies  of  Basil 
the  Great  and  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  &c.  It  was  first  known 
from  a  notice  and  facsimile  in  Blanchini's  Evangeliarium 
Quadruplex  (1748),  Vol.  II.  p.  525. 

This  Codex  contains  the  whole  of  the  Apocalypse,  and  is 
of  considerable  importance,  and  it  much  confirms  the  readings 
of  the  older  Codices  A  and  C. 

We  have  only  noticed  the  principal  uncial  Codices;  we 
have  not  space  to  review  the  vast  number  of  the  minuscule 
Greek  Codices,  which  are  designated  by  critics  with  Arabic 
numerals.  They  date  from  the  tenth  century,  and  though  in- 
ferior in  critical  value  to  the  uncials,  yet  deserve  study  in 
textual  criticism. 

In  the  fifteenth  century  the  art  of  printing  was  invented, 
and  the  first  book  printed  was  a  Latin  Bible  printed  in  Ger- 
many about  the  year  1452.  In  1477  appeared  a  printed 
edition  of  Psalms  in  Hebrew,  with  Kimchi's  Commentary. 
The  most  ancient  edition  of  the  entire  Hebrew  Scriptures  was 
printed  at  Soncino  in  1488. 

The  first  printed  edition  of  the  New  Testament  in  Greek 
is  that  contained  in 

The  COMPLUTENSIAN  Polyglott  (6  Vol.  folio)  is  the  muni- 
ficent design  of  Francis  Ximenes  de  Cisneros  [1437 — 15 17]. 
Cardinal  Archbishop  of  Toledo,  and  Regent  of  Castile  (1506 — 
17).  This  truly  eminent  person,  entered  the  Franciscan  order 
in  1482.  He  carried  the  ascetic  habit  of  his  profession  to  the 
throne  of  Toledo  and  the  palace  of  his  sovereign.  Becoming 
in  1492  Confessor  to  Queen  Isabella  the  Catholic,  and  Primate 
three  years  later,  he  devoted  to  pure  charity  or  to  public  pur- 
poses the  revenues  of  his  See.  He  founded  the  Uni- 
versity at  Alcala  de  Henares  in  New  Castile,  where  he  had 
gone  to  school,  and  defrayed  the  cost  of  an  expedition  which 
as  Regent  he  led  to  Oran  against  the  Moors.  In  1502  he  con- 
ceived the  plan  of  the  first  Polyglott  Bible,  to  celebrate  the 
birth  of  him  who  afterwards  became  the  Emperor  Charles  V. 


THE   COMPLUTENSIAN   POLYGLOTT.  473 

He  gathered  in  his  University  of  Alcala  {Complutum)  as  many 
manuscripts  as  he  could  procure,  with  men  he  deemed  equal 
to  the  task,  of  whom  James  Lopez  de  Stunica  (subsequently 
known  for  his  controversy  with  Erasmus)  was  the  principal ; 
others  being  M..  Antonio  of  Lebrixa,  Demetrius  Ducas  of 
Crete,  and  Ferdinand  of  Valladolid  ("  Pintianus  ").  The  whole 
outlay  of  Cardinal  Ximenes  on  the  Polyglott  is  stated  to  have 
exceeded  50,000  ducats  or  about  ;^23,ooo,  a  vast  sum  in  those 
days.  The  first  volume  printed,  Tom.  V.,  contained  the  New 
Testament  in  two  parallel  columns,  Greek  and  Latin,  the  latter 
that  modification  of  the  Vulgate  then  current :  the  colophon 
on  the  last  page  of  the  Apocalypse  states  that  it  was  com- 
pleted January  10,  15 14,  the  printer  being  Arnald  William  de 
Brocario.  Tom  VL,  comprising  a  Lexicon,  indices,  &c.  bears 
date  March  17,  15 15;  Tom.  L — IV.  of  the  Old  Testament 
complete,  bear  the  date  November  8,  15 17,  in  which 
year  the  Cardinal  died,  full  of  honors  and  good  deeds. 
This  event  must  have  retarted  the  publication  of  the  whole, 
since  Pope  Leo's  license  was  not  granted  until  March  22,  1520, 
and  Erasmus  did  not  see  the  book  before  1522.  As  but  six 
hundred  copies  were  printed,  this  Polyglott  must  from  the 
first  have  been  scarce  and  dear,  and  is  not  always  met  with  in 
Public  Libraries. 

The  deuterocanonical  books,  like  the  New  Testament,  are 
of  course  given  only  in  two  languages ;  in  the  Old  Testament 
the  Latin  Vulgate  holds  the  chief  place  in  the  middle,  between 
the  Hebrew  and  the  Septuagint  Greek.  The  Greek  type  in 
the  other  volumes  is  of  the  common  character,  with  the  usual 
breathings  and  accents ;  in  the  fifth,  or  New  Testament 
volume,  it  is  quite  different,  being  modelled  after  the  fashion 
of  manuscripts  of  about  the  thirteenth  century,  very  bold  and 
elegant,  without  breathings,  and  accentuated  according  to  a 
system  defended  and  explained  in  a  bilingual  preface  tt/jo?  tou? 
ivr€v^ofjL€vov<i,  but  never  heard  of  before  or  since :  monosyllables 
have  no  accent,  in  other  words  the  tone  syllable  receives  the 
acute,  the  grave  and  circumflex  being  discarded. 

It  has  long  been  debated  among  critics  what  manuscripts 
were  used  by  the  Complutensian  editors,  especially  in  the  N.  T. 
Ximenes  is  reported  to  have  spent  4,000  ducats  in  the  purchase 
of  manuscripts.  In  the  Preface  to  the  N.  T.  we  are  assured 
that  "non  quaevis  exemplaria  impressioni  huic  archetypa  fuisse: 
sed  antiquissima  emendatissimaque :  ac  tantae  preterea  vetus- 
tatis,  ut  fidem  eis  abrogare  nefas  videatur:  quae  sanctissimus 
in  Christo  pater  et  dominus  noster  Leo  decimus  pontifex  max- 


474  THE    NEW   TESTAMENT   OF   ERASMUS. 

imus,  huic  institute  favere  cupiens,  ex  apostolica  bibliotheca 
educta  misit."  *  ^  ^  Yet  these  last  expressions  can  hardly 
refer  to  the  N.  T.,  inasmuch  as  Leo  X.  was  not  elected  Pope 
till  March  ii,  15 13,  and  the  N.  T.  was  completed  ]2Si.  10  of  the 
very  next  year.  Add  to  this  that  Vercellone  has  recently 
brought  to  light  the  fact  that  only  two  manuscripts  are  known 
to  have  been  sent  to  the  Cardinal  from  the  Vatican  in  the  first 
year  of  Leo,  and  neither  of  them  (Vat.  330,  346)  contained  any 
part  of  the  N.  T.  The  only  one  of  the  Complutensian  codices 
specified  by  Stunica,  the  Cod.  Rhodiensis  (Act.  52,  see  p.  190), 
has  entirely  disappeared,  and  from  a  catalogue  of  the  thirty 
volumes  of  Biblical  manuscripts  once  in  the  library  at  Alcala, 
but  now  at  Madrid,  communicated  in  1846  by  Don  Jos6 
Gutierrez,  the  librarian,  we  find  that  they  consist  exclusively 
of  Latin  and  Hebrew  books,  with  the  exception  of  two,  which 
contain  portions  of  the  Septuagint  in  Greek. 

That  it  was  corrupted  from  the  parallel  Latin  version  was 
contended  by  Wetstein  and  others  on  very  insuflficient  grounds. 
The  charge  originated  in  that  religious  bigotry  which  refuses 
to  see  aught  of  good  in  anything  that  is  done  under  Catholic 
auspices.  The  edition  reflects  credit  on  the  Catholic 
Church. 

Erasmus'  New  Testament  was  by  six  years  the  earlier 
published,  though  it  was  printed  two  years  later  than  the 
Complutensian.  Its  editor,  both  in  character  and  fortunes, 
presents  a  striking  contrast  with  Ximenes ;  yet  what  he  lacked 
of  the  Castilian's  firmness,  he  more  than  atoned  for  by  his  true 
love  of  learning,  and  the  cheerfulness  of  spirit  that  struggled 
patiently,  if  not  boldly,  with  adversity. 

Desiderius  Erasmus  (e/3ao-/Ato9,  i.  e.  Gerald)  was  born  at 
Rotterdam  in  1465,  or,  perhaps,  a  year  or  two  later.  He 
entered  the  priesthood  in  1492.  Thenceforward,  his  was  the 
hard  life  of  a  solitary  and  wandering  man  of  letters,  earning  a 
precarious  subsistence  from  booksellers  or  pupils,  now  learning 
Greek  at  Oxford  (but  avroSiBaKTo^i),  now  teaching  it  at  Cam- 
bridge (15 10);  losing  by  his  reckless  wit  the  friends  his  vast 
erudition  had  won  ;  restless  and  unfrugal,  perhaps,  yet  always 
laboring  faithfully  and  with  diligence.  He  was  in  England 
when  John  Froben,  a  celebrated  publisher  at  Basle,  moved  by 
the  report  of  the  forthcoming  Spanish  Bible,  and  eager  to  fore- 
stall it,  made  application  to  Erasmus,  through  a  common 
friend,  to  undertake  immediately  an  edition  of  the  N.  T.  "  Se 
daturum  pollicetur,  quantum  alius  quisquam,''  is  the  argument 
employed.     This  proposal  was  sent  on  April  17,  15 15,  before 


THE    NEW   TESTAMENT   OF   ERASMUS.  475 

which  time  Erasmus  had  no  doubt  prepared  numerous  annota- 
tions to  illustrate  a  revised  Latin  version  he  had  long  projected. 
On  September  1 1  it  was  still  unsettled  whether  this  improved 
version  should  stand  by  the  Greek  in  a  parallel  column  (the 
plan  actually  adopted),  or  be  printed  separately  ;  yet  the  colo- 
phon at  the  end  of  Erasmus'  first  edition,  a  large  folio  of  675 
pages,  is  dated  February,  15 16;  the  end  of  the  Anno- 
tations, March  i,  15 16.  Erasmus  dedicated  his  work  to 
LeoX. 

Well  might  Erasmus,  who  had  other  literary  engage- 
ments to  occupy  his  time,  declare  subsequently  that  the 
volume  "  praecipitatum  fuit  verius  quam  editum  ;"  yet  both  on 
the  title-page,  and  in  his  dedication  to  the  Pope,  he  allows 
himself  to  employ  widely  different  language.  When  we  read 
the  assurance  he  addressed  to  Leo,  "  Novum  ut  vocant  Testa- 
mentum  universum  ad  Graecae  originis  fidem  recognovimus, 
idque  non  temere  neque  levi  opera,  sed  adhibitis  in  consilium 
compluribus  utriusque  linguae  codicibus,  nee  iis  sane  quibus- 
libet,  sed  vetustissimis  simul  et  emendatissimis,"  it  is  almost 
painful  to  be  obliged  to  remember  that  a  portion  of  ten  months 
at  the  utmost  could  have  been  devoted  by  Erasmus  to  the 
text,  the  Latin  version  and  the  notes ;  while  the  only  manu- 
scripts he  can  be  imagined  to  have  used  are  Codd.  Evan.  2, 
Act.  Paul.  2,  with  occasional  reference  to  Evan.  Act.  Paul,  i 
and  Act.  Paul.  4,  all  still  at  Basle.  He  used  Apoc.  i 
(now  lost)  alone  for  the  Apocalypse.  All  these,  ex- 
cepting Evan.  Act.  Paul,  i,  were  neither  ancient  nor  particu- 
larly valuable,  and  of  Cod.  i  he  made  but  small  account.  As 
Apoc.  I  was  mutilated  in  the  last  six  verses,  Erasmus  turned 
these  into  Greek  from  the  Latin ;  and  some  portions  of  his 
version,  which  are  found  (however  some  editors  may  speak 
vaguely),  in  no  Greek  manuscript  whatever^  still  cleave  to 
the  received  text. 

When  Ximenes,  in  the  last  year  of  his  life,  was  shown 
Erasmus'  edition,  which  had  got  the  start  of  his  own,  and  his 
editor,  Stunica,  sought  to  depreciate  it,  the  noble  old  man  re- 
plied, "  Would  God  that  all  the  Lord's  people  were  prophets ! 
produce  better,  if  thou  canst ;  condemn  not  the  industry  of 
another.  His  generous  confidence  in  his  own  work  was  not 
misplaced.  He  had  many  advantages  over  the  poor  scholar 
and  the  enterprising  printer  of  Basle,  and  he  had  not  let  them 
pass  unimproved. 

The  text  of  the  Complutensian  Polyglott  is  incomparably 
more  excellent  than  the  hasty  and  uncritical  text  of  Erasmus, 


476  THE   EDITION   OF   ROBERT   ETIENNE. 

and  yet  the  received  Greek  text,  which  formerly  protestants 
so  fondly  worshipped,  was  taken  from  the  text  of  Erasmus.* 

Erasmus  died  at  Basle  in  1536,  having  lived  to  publish  four 
editions  besides  that  of  18 16. 

In  15 18  appeared  the  Graeca  Biblia  at  Venice,  from  the 
celebrated  press  of  Aldus,  which  professes  to  be  grounded  on 
a  collation  of  most  ancient  copies.  However  this  may  be  in 
the  Old  Testament,  it  follows  Erasmus  so  closely  in  the  New 
as  to  reproduce  his  very  errors  of  the  press  (Mill,  N.  T.  Proleg. 
§  1 122),  though  it  is  stated  to  differ  from  him  in  about  200 
places,  for  the  better  or  worse.  If  this  edition  was  really  re- 
vised by  means  of  manuscripts  rather  than  by  mere  conjecture, 
we  know  not  what  they  were,  or  how  far  intelligently  employed. 

The  editions  of  Robert  Etienne,  mainly  by  reason  of  their 
exquisite  beauty,  have  exercised  more  influence  than  those  of 
Erasmus,  and  Etienne's  third  or  folio  edition  of  1550  is  by  many 
regarded  as  the  received  or  standard  text.  This  celebrated 
man  [1503 — 59J  early  commenced  his  career  as  a  printer  at 
Paris.  The  editions  of  1546,  1549  are  small  i2mo.  in  size,  most 
elegantly  printed  with  type  cast  at  the  expense  of  Francis  I. 
The  opening  words  of  the  Preface  common  to  both,  "  O  miri- 
ficam  Regis  nostri  optimi  et  praestantissimi  principis  liberal- 
itatem"  . .  .have  given  them  the  name  Mirificae  by  which  they 
are  known  among  connoisseurs.  Erasmus  and  his  services  to 
sacred  learning,  Etinnne  does  not  so  much  as  name.  He 
speaks  of  "codices  ipsa  vetustatis  specie  pene  adorandos* 
which  he  had  met  with  in  the  King's  Library,  by  which,  he 
boldly  adds  "ita  hunc  nostrum  recensuimus,  ut  nullam  omnino 
literam  secus  esse  pateremur  quam  plures,  iique  meliores  libri, 
tanquam  testes,  comprobarent."  The  Complutensian,  as  he 
admits,  assisted  him  greatly,  and  he  notes  its  close  connection 
with  the  readings  of  his  manuscripts.  Mill  assures  us  {Proleg. 
§  1220)  that  Etienne's  first  and  second  editions  differ  but  in 
67  places.  In  the  folio  or  third  edition  of  1550  the  various 
readings  of  the  Codices,  obscurely  referred  to  in  the  Preface 
to  that  of  1546,  are  entered  in  the  margin.  This  fine  volume 
derives  much  importance  from  its  being  the  earliest  ever  pub- 
lished with  critical  apparatus. 

*"  Optandum  omnino  esset,  inquit  Millius  (N.  T.  Oxonii  1707,  Proleg.  p. 
Ill),  ut  editio  haec  magniflca  (Complutensis),  sicut  omnium  prima  erat,  ita 
sola  quidem  fuisset,  cuius  textus  demto  uno  et  altero  vitio  supra  memorato 
*  *  *  integer  et  illibatus  in  editiones  quasque  posteriores  transiiset." 
Atque  Delitzsch  Handschr.  Funde  I.  p.  5 :  "  Es  waere  in  der  Gliick  gewesen, 
wenn  nicht  der  erasmische  Text,  sondern  der  complutensische  die  Grundlage 
des  spsetem  textus  receptus  geworden  waere."  De  textu  recepto  cfr.  Oregory 
1.  c,  p.  216  sqq.    (Apud  Comely  op.  cit.) 


THE    SEPTUAGINT.  477 

Robert  Etienne  in  these  editions  first  divided  the  New 
Testament  into  verses. 

The  brothers  Bonaventure  and  Abraham  Elzevir  set  up  a 
prrinting  press  at  Leyden  which  maintained  its  reputation  for 
elegance  and  correctness  throughout  the  greater  part  of  the 
seventeenth  century.  One  of  their  minute  editions,  so  much 
prized  by  bibliomanists,  was  a  Greek  Testament,  24mo.,  1642 
alleging  on  the  title-page  (there  is  no  Preface  whatever)  to  be 
ex  Regiis  aliisque  optimis  editionihis  cum  curd  expressum.  By 
Regits,  we  presume,  Etinne's  editions  are  meant,  and  especi- 
ally that  of  1550.  The  supposed  accuracy  (for  which  its  good 
name  is  not  quite  deserved)  and  great  neatness  of  the  little 
book  procured  for  it  much  popularity.  When  this  edition  was 
exhausted,  a  second  appeared  in  1633,  having  the  verses 
broken  up  into  separate  sentences,  instead  of  their  numbers 
being  indicated  in  the  margin,  as  in  1624. 

Etienne's  edition  of  1550,  and  that  of  the  Elzevirs,  have 
been  taken  as  the  Standard  or  Received  text,  the  former  chiefly 
in  England  ;  the  latter,  on  the  continent. 

The  labors  of  the  great  critics  which  we  have  mentioned  in 
collating  authorities  for  different  readings  have  brought  into 
being  what  is  called  the  apparatus  CRITICUS,  being  a  fund  of 
data  showing  the  different  readings  and  their  authorities. 

It  is  evident  from  what  has  been  written,  that  the  Greek 
text  has  not  been  preserved  to  us  in  all  its  pristine  integrity, 
as  it  came  from  the  inspired  writers'  hands.  But  neither  has 
corruption  so  invaded  it  that  it  should  be  considered  an  un- 
reliable fount  of  Scripture.  The  Hebrew,  Greek,  and  Vulgate 
Latin,  remain  three  authentic  founts.  At  times,  one  is  more 
correct,  then  another,  and  the  collation  of  all  three  is  useful  to 
the  understanding  of  any  one.  But  it  must  always  be  con- 
sidered that  in  far  greater  part  the  fulness  and  richness  of  the 
sense  can  only  be  received  from  a  perusal  of  the  original  of 
the  text. 

Chapter  XX. 

The  Septuagint  and  its  Versions. 

The  Septuagint  is  the  first  authentic  Greek  version  of  the 
Old  Testament.  It  is  called  the  Septuagint  from  the  fact, 
that  it  was  supposed  to  be  the  work  of  seventy  or  seventy-two 
interpreters.  Of  its  origin  we  have  many  accounts  all  of 
them  more  or  less  legendary  in  nature.  Aristaeus,  gives  us 
the  first  account  of  its  origin.  According  to  him,  Ptolemy 
Philadelphus  in  the  third  century  B.  C,  wishing  to   found  a 


478  THE    SEPTUAGINT. 

great  library  in  Alexandria,  and  hearing  much  of  the  Jewish 
Law,  sent  messengers  to  Eleazar,  the  high  priest,  desiring  a 
copy  of  the  Books  of  the  Jewish  Law  for  his  library.  The 
high  priest,  Eleazar,  choosing  six  interpreters  from  every  tribe, 
sent  the  seventy-two  interpreters  to  translate  the  books  into 
Greek.  These,  after  being  kindly  received  by  the  King,  be- 
took themselves  to  the  Isle  of  Pharos,  to  a  great  hall,  where 
for  nine  hours  each  day  they  labored  for  seventy  or  seventy- 
two  days,  conferring  with  one  another  in  difficult  passages. 
The  work  was  transcribed  with  care  by  men  employed  by 
Ptolemy,  and  was  pronounced  authentic,  and  an  anathema  was 
pronounced  against  all  who  should  question  its  authority. 
This  in  brief  is  the  story  of  Aristaeus  as  related  by  Flavins 
Josephus,  Antiq.  Bk.  XIL  IL  passim.  Philo,  the  Alexandrine 
Jew,  has  an  account  much  similar,  giving  to  the  interpreters 
divine  inspiration.  He  does  not,  however,  mention  Aristaeus, 
who  according  to  his  own  story,  had  a  great  part  in  the  trans- 
lation. Nor  does  he  mention  Demetrius  Phalereus  who,  ac- 
cording to  Aristaeus,  was  the  Librarian  of  Ptolemy.  St. 
Justin  the  martyr  (ti63  or  167  A.  D.),  has  a  different  version 
of  the  origin  of  the  work.  According  to  him,  the  interpreters 
were  sent  to  the  Isle  of  Pharos  in  separate  cells,  so  all  mutual 
communication  was  cut  off.  There  they  executed  every  one  a 
translation  of  the  Hebrew  text,  which  versions  were  afterwards 
found  to  agree  in  the  most  minute  details,  even  to  the  number 
of  letters.  The  King,  overcome  by  this  miracle,  caused  the 
Jews  to  be  treated  with  great  honors,  and  sent  them  back 
loaded  with  gifts  to  their  own  country. 

St.  Justin  avows  that  he  saw  with  his  own  eyes  the  cells  of 
these  interpreters.  Mention  of  the  seventy  cells  occurs  also 
in  the  works  of  Irenaeus,  Cyrill  of  Jerusalem,  John  Chrysos- 
tom,  and  Augustine.  St.  Epiphanius,  who  lived  in  the  4th 
century  A.  D.,  varies  the  legend  somewhat.  According  to 
him,  there  were  but  36  cells,  and  two  interpreters  in  every  cell. 
All  communication  between  the  cells  was  intercepted,  and 
amanuenses  were  at  hand  to  transmit  to  writing  the  words  of 
the  interpreters.  Thus  thirty-six  versions  were  made,  all  in- 
dependent of  one  another.  On  a  fixed  day,  the  work  being  com- 
pleted, the  King  sat  upon  his  throne ;  the  thirty-six  versions 
were  produced,  and  a  certain  one  of  the  Jews  held  the  Hebrew 
Codex  in  his  hands ;  all  the  versions  were  found  to  agree  in 
everything,  and  nothing  was  changed  from  the  Hebrew  except 
what  was  evidently  useless.  Hence  the  interpreters  were  be- 
lieved  to  be   inspired,   and  a  version  was  ornamented   and 


THE  SEPTUAGINT.  479 

placed  in  the  King's  library,  which  all  should  venerate.  The 
Talmud  of  Jerusalem  and  Babylon,  has  an  account  of  the 
seventy  cells,  adding  that  the  King,  only  after  enclosing  the 
Jews  in  these  cells,  communicated  his  design.  The  marvelous 
agreement  is  related  as  in  the  other  accounts. 

Many  of  the  Fathers  of  the  Church  considered  this  version 
inspired.  Thus  St.  Augustine  says,  that  when  the  seventy 
departed  from  the  Hebrew  text  they  did  so  at  the  instigation 
of  the  Holy  Ghost.  St.  Jerome  rejecting  the  fable  of  the 
seventy  cells  believed  that  only  the  Pentateuch  was  made 
under  Ptolemy.  Hence,  the  origin  of  the  Septuagint  is 
shrouded  in  obscurity. 

Without  doubt  the  interpreters  from  Judea  under  Ptolemy 
translated  at  least  the  Pentateuch,  and  other  unknown  authors 
at  unknown  dates  added  the  others  at  subsequent  periods. 
The  legend  of  the  seventy  cells  is  critically  absurd  and  the 
testimony  of  Aristaeus  of  no  worth.  The  varied  style  of  the 
books  of  the  Septuagint  proves  that  they  are  not  the  work  of 
one  translator.  However  legendary  be  these  accounts,  we 
must  recognize  in  the  origin  of  the  Septuagint  the  special  pro- 
vidence of  God,  ordaining  that  a  version  of  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures, a  complete  version  of  all  the  books,  should  exist  at  the 
advent  of  Christ,  that  the  universal  kingdom  of  Christ  might 
be  the  more  easily  far  and  wide  diffused  through  the  assistance 
of  the  Holy  Writ  existing  in  the  Greek  tongue,  which  at  that 
time  had  become  the  universal  medium  of  communication  of 
thought  in  the  civilized  world.  The  Septuagint  has  the  highest 
approbation,  that  of  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament,  who 
quoted  the  Old  Testament  chiefly  not  from  the  Hebrew,  but 
according  to  the  Greek  version  of  the  Septuagint. 

The  legendary  origin  of  the  Septuagint  caused  many  of  the 
old  Fathers  to  believe  in  the  inspiration  of  the  seventy  interpre- 
ters. St.  Jerome  inveighs  forcibly  against  this  absurdity.  When 
the  earlier  Fathers  in  their  controversy  with  the  Jews  alleged 
passages  from  the  Septuagint  against  them,  the  Jews  responded 
that  these  were  not  in  the  Hebrew  Canon  of  Scripture. 
Hence,  the  Fathers,  to  defend  their  position  invoked  the  in- 
spiration of  the  Septuagint.  From  the  Septuagint  was  made 
the  first  Latin  translation  called  the  Vetus  Itala,  and  to  defend 
this,  St.  Augustine  asserted  the  inspiration  of  the  Septuagint. 

"  For  the  same  Spirit  who  was  in  the  Prophets  when  they 
spoke  these  things  was  also  in  the  seventy  men  when  they 
translated  them,  so  that  assuredly  they  could  also  say  some- 
thing else,  just  as  if  the  Prophet  himself  had  said  both,  because 


480  THE  SEPTUAGINT. 

it  would  be  the  same  Spirit  who  said  both ;  and  they  could  say 
the  same  thing  differently,  so  that,  although  the  words  were  not 
the  same,  yet  the  same  meaning  should  shine  forth  to  those  of 
good  understanding  ;  and  could  omit  or  add  something,  so  that 
even  by  this  it  might  be  shown  that  there  was  in  that  work  not 
human  bondage,  which  the  translator  owed  to  the  words,  but 
rather  divine  power,  which  filled  and  ruled  the  mind  of  the  trans- 
lator." (S.  Aug.  De  Civit.  Dei,  XVIII.  43).  And  indeed  a  strong 
motive  which  induced  the  Fathers  to  defend  the  inspiration 
of  the  Septuagint  was  the  need  of  some  explanation  of  the 
"variantia"  in  the  Texts.  St.  Augustine's  explanation,  ad- 
mitting the  inspiration,  filled  that  need.  Many  Catholic 
writers  hold  with  St.  Jerome  that  only  the  Pentateuch  was 
translated  by  the  seventy  interpreters,  and  the  other  books 
added  at  a  later  date.  So  Vigouroux  and  Montfaucon,  quoted 
by  Vigouroux  in  Manuel  Biblique. 

S.  Hilary  appeals  for  the  authority  of  the  Septuagint  to 
its  great  antiquity,  and  to  the  fact  that  its  translators  had  the 
oral  tradition  of  the  synagogue.  This  is  the  only  reasonable 
motive  for  its  great  value. 

S.  John  Chrysostom  speaks  of  the  great  authority  of  the 
Septuagint,  but  never  hints  at  its  inspiration.  Hence,  we  con- 
clude that  the  Church  has  never  recognized  the  inspiration  of 
the  Septuagint,  and  the  Fathers  who  defended  it,  were  de- 
ceived by  the  legend  of  Aristaeus,  while  the  most  illustrious 
among  them  do  not  insist  on  the  inspiration  of  the  Septuagint 
for  its  great  authority,  but  on  its  great  antiquity,  and  the  char- 
acter of  the  men  who  made  the  version. 

The  different  books  of  the  Septuagint  differ  greatly  in  ex- 
cellence.  The  Pentateuch  is  preeminent  in  accuracy  and  grace 
of  diction.  The  version  of  Proverbs  is  also  excellent.  The 
version  of  Ezechiel  is  the  best  of  the  prophetical  works.  Job 
is  very  imperfectly  rendered ;  many  things  are  omitted,  and 
other  things  plainly  do  not  reproduce  the  sense  of  the  original. 
The  Psalms  and  Ecclesiastes  are  very  defective,  and  so  poor 
was  the  version  of  Daniel,  that  the  Church  discarded  it  and 
substituted  the  version  of  Theodotion. 

The  Jews  of  Palestine  at  first  held  in  high  esteem  the 
Septuagint,  but  as  the  Christians,  in  the  rise  of  Christianity, 
used  it  effectively  against  them,  they  conceived  a  great  hatred 
against  it.  In  detestation  of  it,  they  compared  the  day  on 
which  it  was  completed  to  the  day  on  which  the  golden  calf 
was  set  up  in  the  desert,  and  decreed  a  fast  to  take  place  yearly 
on  that  day.     (Talmud  Tr.  Sopher,  Meg.  Thaanith.)     As  this 


THE   SEPTUAGINT.  481 

hatred  was  shared  by  the  hellenist  Jews,  who  were  ignorant  of 
Hebrew,  they  desired  other  Greek  versions ;  hence  arose  other 
Greek  versions  of  the  Old  Testament. 

Of  the  post-Christian  versions,  that  of  Aquila  is  the  first 
in  order  of  time,  and  it  is  in  the  closest  agreement  with  the 
letter  of  the  Hebrew  text.  The  traditions  relating  to  *A/«i5\a9, 
in  Christian  and  Jewish  writings,  are  so  far  in  agreement  that 
they  may  be  assumed  to  refer  to  one  and  the  same  person. 
By  Epiphanius  he  is  described  {De  Mens,  et  Pond,  §§  13-15)  as 
of  Sinope  in  Pontus,  and  as  irevOepihn]^  of  the  Emperor  Hadrian, 
in  whose  twelfth  year,  and  430  years  after  the  LXX.,  he 
flourished,  and  by  whom  he  was  commissioned  to  superintend 
the  rebuilding  of  Jerusalem.  Seeing  the  faith  and  miracles  of 
the  disciples  of  the  Apostles,  he  is  led  to  embrace  Christianity, 
but  still  clings  to  his  faith  in  the  vain  aarpovoixia,  and  is,  in 
consequence,  excommunicated.  Filled  with  resentment,  he 
becomes  a  pervert  to  Judaism,  and  is  thenceforth  known  as 
Aquila  the  Proselyte.  He  devotes  himself  to  the  Jewish  learn- 
ing, and  renders  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  into  Greek. 

Aquila,  as  a  translator,  aimed  at  an  extreme  literal  exact- 
ness, for  which  he  is,  on  the  whole,  fairly  praised  as  o  Kvpicorara 
€p/xr)V€V€Lv  (f>i\oTifiovfi€vo^  'A/cv\a9  (Origen,  Comment,  on  Genesis, 
I.  16),  and,  on  the  other  hand,  in  places  censured,  as  hovXevayv 
Ti  ''E^paiKy  Xe|et  (Origen  ad  A/ricanum,  §  2).  His  method  is, 
at  times,  the  reductio  ad  absurdum  of  a  literal  rendering;  and 
yet  where  he  is  most  useless  as  an  exegete,  he  may  be  an  im- 
portant witness  on  questions  as  to  the  form  of  the  Hebrew 
text  which  lay  before  him. 

Jerome,  in  his  Epistle  to  Pammachius  (§11,  Vol.  I.  316), 
comparing  Aquila  with  the  LXX,  writes  as  follows :  "  Aquila 
autem  proselytus  et  contentiosus  interpres,  qui  non  solum 
verba  sed  ETYMOLOGIAS  quoque  verborum  transferre  conatus 
est,  jure  projicitur  a  nobis.  Quis  enim  yxo  frumento  et  vino  et 
oleo  possit  vel  legere  vel  intelligere  ij^eO/^a,  oTrapiaixov,  arCk- 
TTvoTTjTa,  quod  nos  possumus  dicere,  /usionem,  pomationem,que, 
et  splendentiam  ?  Aut  quia  Hebraei  non  solum  habent  apdpa 
sed  et  TrpoapOpa  ille  KaKo^rfKo)^  et  SYLLABAS  interpretatur  et 
litteras,  dicitque  avv  rov  ovpavov  koI  crvv  rrjv  fyfjv,  quod  Graeca 
et  Latina  lingua  non  recipit."  But  elsewhere  he  compares  him 
favorably  with  the  LXX,  describing  him  as  a  translator  who 
"  non  contentiosus,  ut  quidam  putant,  sed  studiosius  verbum 
interpretatur  ad  verbum"  {£/>.  ad Damasum,  §  12,  Vol.  L  167). 
The  former  passage  aptly  indicates  the  two  leading  principles 

EE 


482  THE  VERSION    OF   SYMMACHUS. 

of  Aquila,  which  were  to  give  a  Greek  or  quasi-Greek  equiva- 
lent for  every  fragment  of  the  original,  and  to  maintain  a  rigid 
consistency  by  rendering  each  root  with  its  real  or  apparent 
derivatives  by  one  and  the  same  root  in  Greek ;  new  forms 
being  freely  coined  as  the  occasion  demanded,  and  the  Greek 
idiom  being  sacrificed  to  the  Hebrew.  The  peculiar  etymo- 
logical rendering  of  pp,  in  Ex.  XXXIV.  29,  which,  through 

the  Vulgate,  gave  rise  to  the  popular  representation  of  Moses 
with  horns  on  his  forehead,  is  found  to  have  originated  with 
Aquila:  "  Unde  et  in  Exodo  juxta  Hebraicum  et  Aquilae 
editionem  legimus,  Et  Moyses  nesciebat  quia  CORNUTA  ERAT 
species  vultus  ejus,  qui  vere  dicere  poterat,  In  te  inimicos  meos 
cornu  ventiloT 

Aquila  has  been  accused  by  Epiphanius  of  changing  the 
Messianic  testimonies.  Not  enough  of  his  work  remains  to 
examine  if  this  charge  be  true.  Jerome  declares  in  an  Epistle 
to  Marcella,  that  he  had  examined  his  work  with  especial 
attention  to  this  charge,  and  had  found  instead  many  things 
most  favorable  to  Christian  faith.  I  am  disposed  to  believe, 
however,  that  at  times  he  drew  some  passages  to  the  Jewish 
position. 

The  second  Greek  version  which  deserves  special  mention 
is  that  of  Symmachus. 

Eusebius  relates  that  Symmachus  was  an  Ebionite,  and  that 
in  certain  of  his  writings  which  were  still  extant,  he  alleged 
arguments  from  St.  Matthew's  Gospel  in  support  of  his  heresy. 
Jerome  likewise,  in  his  commentary  on  Habacuc  (III.  13,  Vol. 
VI.  656),  describes  Symmachus  and  Theodotion  as  Ebonites : 
"  Theodotio  autem,  vere  quasi  pauper  et  Ebionita,  sed  et 
Symmachus  ejusdem  dogmatis,  pauperem  sensum  secuti  Judaice 
transtulerunt ;"  and  in  his  preface  to  Job  he  speaks  of  them  as 
*' judaizantes  haeretici,  qui  multa  mysteria  Salvatoris  subdola 
interpretatione  celarunt,  et  tamen  in  'E|a7r\ot9  habentur  apud 
ecclesias  et  explanantur  ab  ecclesiasticis  viris  "  (Vol.  IX.  Col. 
1 142).  "  Epiphanius,"  writes  Montfaucon,  "  conspecto  Hexa- 
plorum  ordine,  ubi  Symmachus  ante  Theodotionem  positus 
secundum  locum  in  Graecis  editionibus  occupabat,  putavit 
Symmachum  prius  Theodotione  editionem  suam  concinnasse." 
He  assigns  the  version  of  Symmachus,  perhaps  rightly,  to  the 
reign  of  Severus  (A.  D.  193-21 1) — the  Chronicon  Paschale 
specifies  the  ninth  year  of  this  reign — but  his  account  of  the 
author  is  at  variance  with  the  statements  of  Eusebius  and 
Jerome.     Symmachus  (he  tells  us)  was  a  Samaritan,  who,  from 


THE  VERSION  OF  THEODOTION.  483 

disappointed  ambition,  became  a  proselyte  to  Judaism,  and 
set  to  work  to  compose  his  Greek  version  of  the  Scriptures 
with  a  specific  anti-Samaritan  bias. 

The  version  of  Symmachus  was  distinguished  by  the  purity 
of  its  Greek  and  its  freedom  from  Hebraisms.  Jerome  (fol- 
lowing Eusebius)  several  times  remarks :  "  Symmachus  more 
suo  apertius,"  or  "  manifestius  ";  and  he  praises  him  as  an  in- 
terpreter, "  qui  non  solet  verborum  KaKo^r/Xiav  sed  intelli- 
gentiae  ordinem  sequi "  {Comment,  on  Amos,  III.  ii.  Vol.  VI. 
258).  In  his  preface  to  Lib.  II.  of  the  Chronic.  Euseb.  (Vol. 
VIII.  223-4),  he  writes:  "Quamobrem  Aquila  et  Symmachus 
et  Theodotio  incitati  diversum  paene  opus  in  eodem  opere 
prodiderunt ;  alio  nitente  verbum  de  verbo  exprimere,  alio  sensum 
potius  sequi,  tertio  non  multum.  a  veteribus  discrepare."  Jerome 
not  only  commends  Symmachus  as  above,  but  frequently 
adopts  his  renderings,  as  may  be  shown  by  a  comparison  of 
their  versions. 

Symmachus  shows  his  command  over  the  Greek  language  by 
his  use  of  compounds,  where  the  Hebrew  can  only  represent  the 
same  ideas  by  a  combination  of  separate  words ;  and  no  less 
by  his  free  use  of  particles  to  bring  out  subtle  distinctions  of 
relation  which  the  Hebrew  cannot  adequately  express.  In 
like  manner,  his  rendering  of  the  name  of  Eve  by  Zwo'yovo^ 
preserves  the  word-play  in  Gen.  III.  20;  but  other  names  are 
less  happily  rendered. 

Another  marked  characteristic  of  Symmachus  is  his  ten- 
dency to  adopt  more  or  less  paraphrastic  and  inaccurate 
renderings  under  the  influence  of  dogmatic  prepossession. 

This  is  especially  discernible  where  he  endeavors  to  avoid 
anthropomorphisms. 

The  last  column  of  Origen's  Hexapla  contained  the  ver- 
sion of  Theodotion.  St.  Epiphanius  states  that  Theodotion 
was  of  Pontus,  of  the  sect  of  the  Marcionites,  which  he  aban- 
doned to  embrace  Judaism.  St.  Irenaeus  afifirms  that  he  was 
an  Ephesian,  who  became  a  proselyte  to  Judaism.  His  epoch 
is  very  probably  the  second  half  of  the  second  century. 

Jerome  writes  of  Theodotion  :  "  Qui  utique  post  adventum 
Christi  incredulus  fuit,  licet  eum  quidam  dicant  Ebionitam,  qui 
altero  genere  Judaeus  est  "  ;  but  elsewhere  he  seems  to  adopt 
the  tradition  of  his  Ebionism.  Montfaucon  argues  from  his 
rendering  of  Dan.  IX.  26  that  he  was  a  Jew.  His  aim  as  a 
translator  being  (again  in  the  words  of  Jerome)  "  non  multum 
a  veteribus  discrepare,"  not  so  much  to  make  a  new  translation 
as  to  revise  the  old,  correcting  its  errors  and  supplying  its 


484  THE   HEXAPLA   OF   ORIGEN. 

defects,  it  not  unnaturally  came  to  pass  that  Origen  made  free 
use  of  his  version  in  constructing  the  Hexaplar  recension  of 
the  LXX  ;  and  that,  in  the  case  of  the  Book  of  Daniel,  even 
the  recension  of  Origen  was  popularly  discarded  in  favor  of 
Theodotion's  version  in  its  entirety.  His  style  does  not  present 
such  marked  peculiarities  as  those  of  Aquila  and  Symmachus. 
Suffice  it  to  notice  that  he  is  more  addicted  to  transliteration 
than  they  or  the  LXX ;  and  that,  on  account  of  the  number 
of  the  words  which  he  thus  leaves  untranslated,  he  has  been 
regarded  as  an  ignorant  interpreter.  The  charge,  however, 
cannot  be  sustained. 

Besides  the  aforesaid  versions,  three  others  were  in  exist- 
ence of  which  but  little  is  known.  They  are  designated  as 
Fifth,  Sixth,  and  Seventh,  from  the  position  which  they 
occupied  in  Origen's  Hexapla.  It  is  probable  that  they  did 
not  contain  all  the  books.  The  old  writers  so  differ  in  describ- 
ing where  they  were  found  that  nothing  definite  can  be  known 
of  them.  Of  the  seventh  no  trace  remains,  and  we  only  know 
of  its  existence  from  the  fact  that  Eusebius  (Hist.  Eccles.  VI. 
i6)  declares,  that  Origen  added  it  to  the  other  in  the  edition 
of  the  Psalms,  thereby  making  the  edition  Enneapla. 

The  great  use  which  had  been  made  of  the  Septuagint  by 
the  Jews  previously  to  their  rejection  of  it,  and  the  constant 
use  of  it  by  the  Christians,  naturally  caused  a  multiplication  of 
copies,  in  which  numerous  errors  became  introduced,  in  the 
course  of  time,  from  the  negligence  or  inaccuracy  of  transcribers, 
and  from  glosses  or  marginal  notes,  which  had  been  added  for 
the  explanation  of  difficult  words,  being  suffered  to  creep  into 
the  text.  In  order  to  remedy  this  growing  evil,  Origen,  in 
the  early  part  of  the  third  century,  undertook  the  laborious 
task  of  collating  the  Greek  text,  then  in  use,  with  the  original 
Hebrew,  and  with  other  Greek  translations  then  extant,  and 
from  the  whole  to  produce  a  new  recension  or  revisal.  Twenty- 
eight  years  were  devoted  to  the  preparation  of  this  arduous 
work,  in  the  course  of  which  he  collected  manuscripts  from 
every  possible  quarter,  aided  (it  is  said)  by  the  pecuniary 
liberality  of  Ambrose,  an  opulent  man,  whom  he  had  converted 
from  the  Valentinian  heresy,  and  with  the  assistance  of  seven 
copyists  and  several  persons  skilled  in  calligraphy,  or  the  art  of 
beautiful  writing.  Origen  commenced  his  labor  at  Csesarea, 
A.  D.  231,  and,  it  appears,  finished  his  Polyglott  at  Tyre,  but 
in  what  year  is  not  precisely  known. 

This  noble  critical  work  is  designated  by  various  names  among 
ancient  writers,  as  Tetrapla,  Hexapla,  Octapla,  and  Enneapla, 


THE   HEXAPLA   OF   ORIGEN.  485 

The  Tetrapla  contained  the  four  Greek  versions  of  Aquila, 
Symmachus,  the  Septuagint,  and  Theodotion,  disposed  in  four 
columns ;  to  these  he  added  two  columns  more,  containing  the 
Hebrew  text  in  its  original  characters,  and  also  in  Greek  letters. 
These  six  columns,  according  to  Epiphanius,  formed  the  Hex- 
apla.  Having  subsequently  discovered  two  other  Greek  ver- 
sions of  some  parts  of  the  Scriptures,  usually  called  the  fifth 
and  sixth,  he  added  them  to  the  preceding,  inserting  them  in 
their  respective  places,  and  thus  composed  the  Octapla ;  and  a 
separate  translation  of  the  Psalms,  usually  called  the  seventh 
version,  being  afterwards  added,  the  entire  work  has  by  some 
been  termed  the  Enneapla.  This  appellation,  however,  was 
never  generally  adopted.  But,  as  the  two  editions  generally 
made  by  Origen  generally  bore  the  name  of  the  Tetrapla,  and 
Hexapla,  Bauer,  after  Montfaucon,  is  of  opinion  that  Origen 
edited  only  the  Tetrapla  and  Hexapla ;  and  this  appears  to  be 
the  real  fact. 

The  accompanying  plates  will  give  some  concept  of  Origen's 
great  work. 

Aquila's  version  is  placed  next  to  the  Greek  translitera- 
tion of  the  Hebrew  text ;  that  of  Symmachus  occupies  the 
fourth  column ;  the  Septuagint,  the  fifth ;  and  Theodotion's, 
the  sixth.  The  other  three  anonymous  translations,  not  con- 
taining the  entire  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  were  placed  in 
the  three  last  columns  of  the  Enneapla.  Where  the  same 
words  occurred  in  all  the  other  Greek  versions,  without  being 
particularly  specified,  Origen  designated  them  by  A  or  AG, 
AoiTTot,  the  rest ; — Ot  T,  or  the  three,  denoted  Aquila,  Sym- 
machus, and  Theodotion  ; — Ot  A,  or  the  four,  signified  Aquila, 
Symmachus,  the  Septuagint,  and  Theodotion ;  and  11,  Havrei, 
all  the  interpreters. 

Where  any  passages  appeared  in  the  Septuagint,  that  were 
not  found  in  the  Hebrew,  he  designated  them  by  an  obelus  -^ 
with  two  bold  points  (:)  also  annexed.  This  mark  was  a  so  used 
to  denote  words  not  extant  in  the  Hebrew,  but  added  by  the 
Septuagint  translators,  either  for  the  sake  of  elegance,  or  for 
the  purpose  of  illustrating  the  sense. 

To  passages  wanting  in  the  copies  of  the  Septuagint,  and 
supplied  by  himself  from  the  other  Greek  versions,  he  prefixed 
an  asterisk  '^-  with  two  bold  points  (:)  also  annexed,  in  order 
that  his  additions  might  be  immediately  perceived.  These 
supplementary  passages,  we  are  informed  by  Jerome,  were  for 
the  most  part  taken  from  Theodotion's  translation ;  not  unfre- 
quently  from  that  of  Aquila ;  sometimes,  though  rarely,  from 


486 


THE  HEXAPLA   OF   ORIGEN. 


SPECIMINA   TETRAFLORUM,    HEXAPLORUM. 


'AKYAA2. 

Kai  fi€Ta  Tai  inra  i0So/id8ai  koi  i^rJKOvTa  8vo 

l^oXo0p€V$rj(T€Tai^\€lfXfiiuO9 


I.     TETKAPLA. 

2YMMAX02. 

Kai  fXiTci  rdts.  i^SofidSas  ras  inr^  KalA^riKOVTa  Svo 

iKKCTrrjcriTai  xpiarTo^ 

KOI  ov\  {mdp^ii  avTw. 


II    HDXAPLA,^ 


TO  *EBPAIKON. 

isj^yn  n^iB>  nun 

pwt5rri»N.  nwa  niy  pip:. " 
03TO  prv  nnpW 


TO  'EBPAIKON  'EAAHNIKOIS 

TPAMMA2I. 

'oV^ad  aTjvi6  de(Tov 

/3«;(t  ovavaKa 

fir)r)»  aiSi  x^tVPtod  cX  ofifiaPa 

ovKoKed  pcuTOV  luiSrjxffi. 


'A. 

tcaV  Tovto  hfVTtpov  cTrdieiT* 
itifH^vmert  boKpfVi^  T^  6v<ria(rrrfpiov  (IIIIII) 

difft  Tov  (ifi  ejvat  (Ti  pevaat  irpbs  to  hapov 
KcX  Tiq^fh  fvBoKiav  diro  xftpo?  vfiSiP. 


TO 'EBP./ 


•EBP. 'EAAHN.  PP. 


.'A. 


to'ebp:. 


TOVEBPl'EAAHN.  PP. 

p-rtpip.  peo'&aap 
Xa/craX  u\€8(6€)(. 


*A. 
arrh  pL'^rpcc^  i^a>p$pi<Tpii/T]s 
_  '/xroi  Sp6<r6t  irdiSioTfiros;  <rov. 


IIL    HEPTAPBA 
2. 

iy  rfj  cpdpayyi  KiSpcdvL 


IV.     OCTAPItA 

2. 

<roi  dpScoi  ^  vioTTfi  aov; 


THE  HEXAPLA  OF  ORIGEN. 


487 


HEPTAPLORUM   ET   OCTAPLORUM. 


Dan.  ix.  26. 

01  O'. 

Kal  fi€Th  iiTTk  KOL  i^Sofi-qKouta  Kat  i^^KovTa  8vo 

diroa-TaOrjcr^Tai  ^pia-fia 

Kal  ovK  iorai. 


eEOAOTIQN. 

Kal  ii€Tcc  ra^  i^So/jidSas  roci  iirJKOVTa  8vo^ 

€io\o$p^pOrj(r€Tai  XP^^I^^ 

Kal  Kpi/ia  bvK  €<mv  €v  avT^. 


Mal.  ii.  13. 


s. 


(tot  tovra  btvTfpov  iiroiure 
iimovTts  eV  boKpvai  t6  dvffuurnjpiou  (lUIIl) 

KKaiovTts  Koi  oifiaorarovrts 

hrtp  ToO  fi^  tivai  rrt  vtvovra  npbs  t6  bapov 

fit  be^avBat  rb  tvBoKiJiifvov  dnb  xtipbs  Vjiav. 


0'. 


fcoi  Tavra  &  ifturow  hroitiTe 

cKaXwrrrre  baKpvai  to  6v(ria(rnjpiov  levplov 

Koi  KKavSfia  Koi  (rrfvayfico 

tK  KonoaV  rri  a^iov  tm^f'^ai  fls  Bvaiav 

rj  Xa^tlv  8(Kt6v  (K  tSdv  xfipiiv  v/iwv. 


e. 

Ka\  Tovro  btvTtpov  (iroifjvaTt 
fKdkvnrrre.bdKpvai  t6  Bvaiaarfipiov  (ITini) 

IcKaiOVTa  Koi  (TTfVOVTtS 

dnb  Tov  (if)  tiuai  tn  TrpooTjrytfoJ/ra  to  o\oKavTafia 
Koi  "Ka^fiv  reXtiov  tK  xtipav  vpiuv. 


4  Reg.  xxiii.  4. 
O'. 

€1/  a-aSrjiXQiO  KiSpoov. 


e. 

€v  TJi  (pdpayyL  K.i8pa>v. 


kv  rm  ifjcnvpio-fi^  tov  ')(^iiixdppov. 


PSAL.  cix.  3. 

O'. 

€<  yaarpos  npo  ia>(r(f>6pov 


\  0. 

1 

€K  firiTpa^  ano  irpcot 
(croi  Sp6<ros)  veoT'qTos  crov. 


E'. 

e<  fiTjrpas  otto  SpOpov 
(rot  Spoaos  ^  veoTrjs  <tov. 


S'. 

Ik  yaa-rpos  (r^Trjaovcri 
o-e,  Bp6(ro9  ueaviKorijTO^  aov. 


488  THE   HEXAPLA   OF   ORIGEN. 

the  version  of  Symmachus ;  and  sometimes  from  two  or  three 
together.  But,  in  every  case,  the  initial  letter  of  each  trans- 
lator's name  was  placed  immediately  after  the  asterisk,  to  indi- 
cate the  source  whence  such  supplementary  passage  was  taken. 
And  in  lieu  of  the  very  erroneous  Septuagint  version  of  Daniel, 
Theodotion's  translation  of  that  book  was  inserted  entire. 

Further,  not  only  the  passages  wanting  in  the  Septuagint 
were  supplied  by  Origen  with  the  asterisks,  as  above  noticed, 
but  also  where  that  version  does  not  appear  accurately  to 
express  the  Hebrew  original,  having  noted  the  former  reading 
with  an  obelus,  -i-,  he  added  the  correct  rendering  from  one 
of  the  other  translators,  with  an  asterisk  subjoined.  Concern- 
ing the  shape  and  uses  of  the  lemniscus  and  hypolemniscus,  two 
other  marks  used  by  Origen,  there  is  so  great  a  difference  of 
opinion  among  learned  men,  that  it  is  difficult  to  determine 
what  they  were. 

In  the  Pentateuch,  Origen  compared  the  Samaritan  text 
with  the  Hebrew  as  received  by  the  Jews,  and  noted  their 
differences.  To  each  of  the  translations  inserted  in  his  Hexapla 
was  prefixed  an  account  of  the  author ;  each  had  its  separate 
prolegomena ;  and  the  ample  margins  were  filled  with  notes. 
A  few  fragments  of  these  prolegomena  and  marginal  annota- 
tions have  been  preserved ;  but  nothing  remains  of  his  history 
of  the  Greek  versions. 

Since  Origen's  time,  biblical  critics  have  distinguished  two 
editions  or  exemplars  of  the  Septuagint — the  Kotvrj  or  com- 
mon text,  with  all  its  errors  and  imperfections,  as  it  existed 
previously  to  his  collation ;  and  the  Hexaplar  text,  or  that 
corrected  by  Origen  himself.  For  nearly  fifty  years  was  this 
great  man's  stupendous  work  buried  in  a  corner  of  the  city  of 
Tyre,  probably  on  account  of  the  very  great  expense  of 
transcribing  forty  or  fifty  volumes,  which  far  exceeded  the 
means  of  private  individuals ;  and  here,  perhaps,  it  might  have 
perished  in  oblivion,  if  Eusebius  and  Pamphilus  had  not  dis- 
covered it,  and  deposited  it  in  the  library  of  Pamphilus  the 
martyr,  at  Caesarea,  where  Jerome  saw  it  about  the  middle  of 
the  fourth  century.  As  we  have  no  account  whatever  of 
Origen's  autograph,  after  this  time,  it  is  most  probable  that  it 
perished  in  the  year  653,  on  the  capture  of  that  city  by  the 
Arabs ;  and  a  few  imperfect  fragments,  collected  from  manu- 
scripts of  the  Septuagint  and  the  Catenae  of  the  Greek  fathers, 
are  all  that  now  remain  of  a  work,  which  in  the  present  improv- 
ed state  of  sacred  literature,  would  most  eminently  have  assist- 
ed in  the  interpretation  and  criticism  of  the  Old  Testament. 


THE  PRINCIPAL  EDITIONS  THE  SEPTUAGINT.  489 

As  the  Septuagint  version  had  been  read  in  the  Church 
from  the  commencement  of  Christianity,  so  it  continued  to  be 
used  in  most  of  the  Greek  churches ;  and  the  text,  as  corrected 
by  Origen,  was  transcribed  for  their  use,  together  with  his  crit- 
ical marks.  Hence,  in  the  progress  of  time,  from  the  negli- 
gence or  inaccuracy  of  copyists,  numerous  errors  were  intro- 
duced into  this  version,  which  rendered  a  new  revisal  neces- 
sary ;  and,  as  all  the  Greek  churches  did  not  receive  Origen's 
biblical  labors  with  equal  deference,  three  principal  recensions 
were  undertaken  nearly  at  the  same  time,  of  which  we  are  now 
to  offer  a  brief  notice. 

The  first  was  the  edition,  undertaken  by  Eusebius  and 
Pamphilus  about  the  year  300,  from  the  Hexaplar  text,  with 
the  whole  of  Origen's  critical  marks ;  it  was  not  only  adopted 
by  the  churches  of  Palestine,  but  was  also  deposited  in  almost 
every  library.  By  frequent  transcriptions,  however,  Origen's 
marks  or  notes  became,  in  the  course  of  a  few  years,  so  much 
changed,  as  to  be  of  little  use,  and  were  finally  omitted ;  this 
omission  only  augmented  the  evil,  since  even  in  the  time  of 
Jerome  it  was  no  longer  possible  to  know  what  belonged  to  the 
translators,  or  what  were  Origen's  own  corrections ;  and  now 
it  may  almost  be  considered  as  a  hopeless  task  to  distinguish 
between  them.  Contemporary  with  the  edition  of  Eusebius 
and  Pamphilus,  was  the  recension  of  the  Koti/?/,  or  Vulgate  text 
of  the  Septuagint,  conducted  by  Lucian,  a  presbyter  of  the 
Church  at  Antioch,  who  suffered  martyrdom  A.  D.  311.  He 
took  the  Hebrew  text  for  the  basis  of  his  edition,  which  was 
received  in  all  the  Eastern  churches  from  Constantinople  to 
Antioch.  While  Lucian  was  prosecuting  his  biblical  labors, 
Hesychius,  an  Egyptian  bishop,  undertook  a  similar  work, 
which  was  generally  received  in  the  churches  of  Egypt.  He 
is  supposed  to  have  introduced  fewer  alterations  than  Lucian ; 
and  his  edition  is  cited  by  Jerome  as  the  Exemplar  Alexan- 
drinum.  All  the  manuscripts  of  the  Septuagint  now  extant,  as 
well  as  the  printed  editions,  are  derived  from  the  three  recen- 
sions above  mentioned,  although  biblical  critics  are  by  no 
means  agreed  what  particular  recension  each  manuscript  has 
followed. 

There  are  four  principal  printed  editions  of  the  Septuagint. 
The  first  in  time  and  excellence  was  that  of  Cardinal  Ximenes, 
printed  in  his  Polyglott,  in  15 17. 

Theprintingof  this  splendid  and  celebrated  work,  usually  call- 
ed the  Complutensian  Polyglott,  was  commenced  in  1502.  Though 
completed  in  15 17,  it  was  not  published  until  1522,  and  it  cost 


490        THE  PRINCIPAL  EDITIONS   OF  THE   SEPTUAGINT. 

the  munificent  cardinal  Ximenes  50,000  ducats.  This  Poly- 
glott  is  usually  divided  into  six  volumes.  The  first  four  com- 
prise the  Old  Testament,  with  the  Hebrew,  Latin,  and  Greek, 
in  three  distinct  columns,  the  Chaldee  paraphrase  being  at  the 
bottom  of  a  page  with  a  Latin  interpretation  ;  and  the  margin 
is  filled  with  Hebrew  and  Chaldee  radicals.  The  fifth  volume 
contains  the  Greek  Testament,  with  the  Vulgate  Latin  version 
in  a  parallel  column ;  in  the  margin  there  is  a  kind  of  concord- 
ance, referring  to  similar  passages  in  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ments. 

The  second  principal  edition  is  called  the  Aldine  EDITION, 
published  in  Venice  in  15 18.  It  was  called  Aldine  from  the 
printer  Aldus  Manutius,  though  it  did  not  appear  till  two  years 
after  his  death,  and  was  executed  under  the  care  of  Andreas 
Asulanus,  the  father-in-law  of  Aldus  Manutius.  This  edition 
was  much  copied  by  the  protestants,  who,  therefore,  endeavor 
to  exalt  it  above  the  Complutensian  text,  but  foundation  is 
lacking  for  such  excellence. 

The  third  principal  edition  in  order  of  time,  though  first  in 
excellence  is  that  called  the  sixtine  edition.  It  was  under- 
taken at  the  suggestion  of  Cardinal  Montaltus,  during  the 
reign  of  Gregory  XIII.,  and  when,  at  the  death  of  Gregory, 
Montaltus  ascended  the  papal  throne  under  the  name  of  Sixtus 
v.,  he  brought  the  work  to  completion  and  hence  it  bears  his 
name.  Its  full  title  is  'H  HaXata  Aia0r)Krj,  Kara  Tov<i  'Fi^Bofirj- 
Kovra  8c  av6evTia<;  "Svcrrov  E.  ^Axpov  Kp')(^tepea)<i  eKSodeicra. — 
Vetus  Testamentum  Graecum,  juxta  LXX  Interpretes,  studio 
Antonii  Cardinalis  Carafe,  ope  virorum  doctorum  adjuti,  cum 
prefatione  et  scholiis  Petri  Morini.  Romae  ex  Typographia 
Francisci  Zannetti,  1586,  folio. 

It  is  a  beautiful  edition,  of  great  rarity  and  value.  It  con- 
tains 783  pages  of  text,  preceded  by  four  leaves  of  preliminary 
matter,  which  are  followed  by  another  (subsequently  added), 
entitled  Corrigenda  in  notationibus  Psalterii.  This  last  men- 
tioned leaf  is  not  found  in  the  copies  bearing  the  date  of  1586, 
which  also  want  the  privilege  of  Pope  Sixtus  V.  dated  May  9th, 
1587,  at  whose  request  and  under  whose  auspices  it  was  under- 
taken by  Cardinal  Antonio  Carafa,  aided  by  Antonio  Agelli, 
Peter  Morinus,  Fulvio  Ursino,  Robert  Bellarmin,  Cardinal 
Sirleti,  and  others.  The  celebrated  Codex  Vaticanus  1209  was 
the  basis  of  the  Roman  or  Sixtine  edition,  as  it  is  usually 
termed.  The  first  forty-six  chapters  of  Genesis,  together  with 
some  of  the  Psalms,  and  the  book  of  Maccabees,  being  oblit- 
erated from  the  Vatican  manuscript  through  extreme  age,  the 


THE  VETUS    ITALA.  491 

editors  are  said  to  have  supplied  this  deficiency,  by  compiling 
those  parts  of  the  Septuagint  from  a  manuscript  out  of  Car- 
dinal Bessarion's  library,  and  from  another  which  was  brought 
to  them  from  Calabria.  So  great  was  the  agreement  between 
the  latter  and  the  Codex  Vaticanus,  that  they  were  supposed 
to  have  been  transcribed,  either  the  one  from  the  other,  or 
both  from  the  same  copy.  Various  readings  are  given  to  each 
chapter.  This  edition  contains  the  Greek  text  only.  In  1588, 
FJaminio  Nobili  printed  at  Rome  in  folio,  Veius  Testamentum 
secundum  LXX.  Latine  redditunt.  This  Latin  version  was 
not  composed  by  him,  but  compiled  out  of  the  fragments  of 
the  ancient  Latin  translations,  especially  the  Old  Italian.  It  is 
a  splendid  volume,  and  of  considerable  rarity.  The  Roman 
edition  was  re-printed  at  Paris,  in  1628,  in  three  folio  volumes; 
the  New  Testament  in  Greek  and  Latin,  forms  the  third  volume. 
This  reprint  is  in  great  request,  not  only  for  the  neatness  and 
correctness  of  its  execution,  but  also  for  the  learned  notes 
which  accompany  it. 

The  fourth  of  these  principal  editions  is  that  published  by 
Grabe,  at  Oxford.  This  edition  exhibits  the  text  of  the  cele- 
brated Codex  Alexandrinus,  now  deposited  in  the  British 
Museum.  Though  Grabe  prepared  the  whole  for  the  press,  yet 
he  only  lived  to  publish  the  Octateuch,  forming  the  first  volume 
of  the  folio  edition,  in  1707,  and  the  fourth  volume  containing 
the  metrical  books,  in  1709.  The  second  volume,  comprising 
the  historical  books,  was  edited  by  Francis  Lee,  M.  D.,  in  1719 ; 
and  the  third  volume,  including  the  prophetical  books,  by  W. 
Wigan,  in  1720.  This  edition  gives  a  representation  of  the 
Alexandrian  Manuscript  where  it  was  perfect ;  but  where  it 
was  defective  and  incorrect,  the  passages  supplied  and  the 
corrected  readings  are  given,  partly  from  the  Codex  Vaticanus, 
and  partly  from  the  Complutensian  edition,  in  a  smaller 
character  than  that  employed  in  the  text. 

Tischendorf  judged  unfavorably  of  the  work  since  the  author 
gave  excessive  credit  to  Codex  A,  and  imitated  the  Hexaplaof 
Origen.  The  work  has  failed  to  obtain  a  lasting  place  as  a  great 
work  of  Scripture. 

Chapter  XXI. 

Versions  Derived  from  the  Septuagint. 

While  the  Covenant  of  God  was  restricted  to  the  Jewish 
race,  the  Hebrew  and  Septuagint  texts  sufficed  for  the  world. 
But  when  the  Message  of  Christ  spread  abroad  through  the 
the  nations,  there  arose  a  need  for  other  versions  of  Scripture. 


492  THE  VETUS  ITALA. 

Among  these  old  versions,  the  first  in  order  of  time  and 
excellence,  is  the  old  Latin  version  commonly  called  the 
Vetus  Itala. 

The  origin  of  this  version  is  involved  in  obscurity,  and  like 
many  questions  of  its  kind,  furnishes  a  theme  for  many  differ- 
ent learned  conjectures.  We  shall  be  content  to  briefly  set 
forth  the  most  probable  data. 

The  language  in  which  the  message  of  Christ  was  first  pre- 
sented to  the  Roman  world,  was  Greek.  Sufficient  evidence 
warrants  the  conclusion  that  the  liturgical  language  of  Italy 
for  the  first  two  centuries  was  Greek.  De  Rossi  believes  that 
it  was  not  till  toward  the  close  of  the  third  century  that  Greek 
was  superseded  by  Latin  in  the  Western  Church.*  But  in 
Pro-consular  Africa,  though  the  language  of  the  masses  was 
Punic,  the  liturgical  language  must  have  been  Latin  from  the 
earliest  times.  This  has  led  many  to  assign  Africa  as  the 
place  of  origin  of  the  Itala.  Wiseman,  Hug,  Maier,  Hagen, 
Lehir,  Himpel  and  Comely  support  such  opinion.  Reithmayr, 
Gams  and  Kaulen  place  the  origin  of  the  version  in  Italy. 
The  supporters  of  the  first  opinion  allege  that  the  version 
would  originate  where  it  was  needed,  and  it  would  be  assign- 
ing too  late  a  date  to  the  version,  to  place  it  in  the  epoch  of 
the  decline  of  the  Greek  language  in  the  West.  They  say, 
moreover,  that  the  diction  of  the  Vetus  Itala,  is  like  to  that  of 
Tertullian.  Against  this  it  may  be  urged  that  Greek  never 
was  the  language  of  the  masses  in  Italy,  and  that  the  low, 
humble  diction  of  the  Vetus  Itala  shows  that  it  was  not  the 
work  of  savants ;  and  it  bears  evidence  that  it  was  especially 
intended  for  the  humbler  classes,  and  was  most  probably  made 
by  men  of  limited  literary  ability.  Its  Latinity  is  exceedingly 
barbarous,  so  that  Arnobius  felt  called  upon  to  defend  it 
against  the  ridicule  of  the  pagans.  This  very  fact  proves  that 
it  was  not  made  by  the  principal  men  in  the  Church,  but  by 
private  individuals  for  private  use,  while  Greek  held  the  post 
of  the  authentic  Scripture  of  the  Church.  Moreover,  the 
barbarisms  of  the  Vetus  Itala,  are  by  no  means  simply  Afri- 
canismsy  but  are  found  in  all  the  low  Latin  of  the  first  cen- 
turies. I  believe  that  if  the  edition  were  made  in  Africa, 
where  Latin  was  the  liturgical  language,  as  they  contend,  it 

*Q.  B.  de  Rossi  (Roma  Sotteranea,  Roma  1867,  11.  p.  236  sq.):  "L'uso  cos- 
tante  della  lingua  greca  in  quegli  epitaffl  (del  romani  pontefici)  6  prova  mani- 
festa,  che  greco  f u  il  linguaggio  ecclesiastico  della  chiesa  romana  nel  secolo 
terzo.  *  *  *  Circa  la  fine  del  secolo  terzo,  o  volgendo  il  quarto,  la  greca 
lingua  ecclesiastica  cedette  in  Roma  il  luogo  alia  latina." 


THE  VETUS   ITALA.  493 

would  be  made  by  the  chief  men  of  the  Church,  who  certainly 
could  write  better  Latin  than  the  text  of  the  Vetus  Itala.  I 
believe,  therefore,  that  in  this  question,  which  does  not  admit 
of  a  certain  answer,  the  greater  weight  of  probability  stands 
for  Italy  as  the  place  of  origin  of  the  first  Latin  translation. 
Regarding  the  mode  of  its  origin,  it  seems  quite  certain  that 
it  was  the  work  of  many  private  individuals.  St.  Augustine, 
a  most  competent  judge  in  this  matter,  declares  the  manner  in 
which  the  early  translations  were  made : 

"For  the  translations  of  the  Scriptures  from  Hebrew  into 
Greek  can  be  counted,  but  the  Latin  translators  are  out  of  all 
number.  For  in  the  early  days  of  the  faith,  every  man  who 
happened  to  get  his  hands  upon  a  Greek  manuscript,  and  who 
thought  he  had  any  knowledge,  were  it  ever  so  little,  of 
the  two  languages,  ventured  upon  the  work  of  translation." 
(Enchirid.  of  Christ.  Doct.  Bk.  H.  XL) 

It  is  evident  that  the  numerous  translators  did  not  translate 
the  whole  Bible,  but  certain  books,  so  that  there  were  many 
different  translations  of  the  several  books  made  by  different 
authors.  Jerome  complains  bitterly  of  these  numerous  trans- 
lators :  "  With  the  Latins  there  are  as  many  different  versions 
as  there  are  codices,  and  every  one  arbitrarily  adds  or  takes 
away  what  he  pleases."     (Hier.  Praef.  in  Josue.) 

In  this  multiplicity  of  versions  of  the  different  books  it 
soon  resulted  that  the  whole  Bible  existed  in  Latin,  with  con- 
siderable diversity  in  the  different  codices.  It  must  have  been 
also  that  some  of  the  books  were  more  faithfully  translated 
than  others.  The  next  step  seems  to  have  been  that  the 
churches  collected  these  various  translations  of  the  individual 
books  into  complete  catalogues  of  Scripture.  Here,  also, 
diversity  resulted,  for  the  different  churches  collected  different 
versions,  and  the  works  of  the  librarii  dormitantes  and  the 
imperiti  emendatores,  was  continued.  Such  was  the  condition 
of  the  Latin  text  when  Jerome  took  it  up  and  revised  it 
according  to  the  Greek.  Now,  among  the  various  complete 
versions  thus  brought  together,  Augustine  designates  one  as 
the  Italian  version  :  "  Now  among  the  translations  themselves 
the  Italian  is  to  be  preferred  to  the  others,  for  it  keeps  closer 
to  the  words,  without  prejudice  to  clearness  of  expression." 
(op.  cit.  15.)  It  is  certain,  therefore,  that  in  Augustine's  time, 
out  of  the  various  translations  of  the  individual  books,  there 
had  resulted  several  complete  versions,  among  which,  in  his 
judgment,  the  Vetus  Itala  was  preeminent.  It  is  probable 
that  a  beginning  was  made  to  translate  the  Scriptures  into 


494  REVISIONS  OF  JEROME. 

Latin  even  in  the  Apostolic  age.  As  in  that  age  intense 
activity  was  manifested  in  all  things  that  pertained  to  religion, 
without  doubt  several  translations  of  the  different  books  were 
soon  in  existence.  It  is  quite  probable  that  one  of  these  com- 
plete versions,  at  a  very  early  age,  obtained  a  place  of  eminence 
in  the  churches  of  Italy ;  perhaps  it  was  in  a  certain  sense 
authorized  by  the  authorities  in  those  churches.  Thus  it  came 
to  be  termed  the  "  Itala,"  and  as  Jerome  called  it  the  old, 
in  contradistinction  to  his  version,  it  thus  became  known  as 
the  Old  Italian  Version. 

Its  language  was  ruder  than  the  ordinary  Latin  of  the 
period.  It  coined  many  new  words,  adopted  many  Greek 
words  and  idioms,  and  confounded  genders,  declinations,  and 
conjugations. 

The  condition  of  the  Latin  text  in  the  beginning  of  the 
fourth  century  was  deplorable.  Innumerable  codices  existed 
widely  differing  from  each  other.  Translators,  correctors,  and 
transcribers  had  rendered  the  text  in  a  great  measure  uncer- 
tain. 

To  remedy  this  evil  Pope  Damasus  (t384),  commissioned 
St.  Jerome  to  revise  the  Latin  text.  Jerome  began  his  labors 
at  Rome  in  383,  and  first  revised  the  Psalter  "juxta  septua- 
ginta  interpretes,  licet  cursim,  magna  tamen  ex  parte."  This 
emendation  is  called  the  Roman  Psalter.  It  was  immediately 
adopted  in  liturgical  use  at  Rome,  and  remained  in  use  in  the 
churches  of  Italy,  till  the  time  of  St.  Pius  V.  (ti572).  The 
same  year  he  also  corrected  the  Gospels,  "  Evangelia  ad  Grae- 
cam  fidem  revocavit."  The  norm  of  Jerome  in  this  emenda- 
tion was  to  depart  as  little  as  possible  from  the  usual  reading, 
therefore,  "  ita  calamo  temperavit  ut,  his  tantum  quae  sensum 
videbantur  mutare  correctis,  reliqua  manere  pateretur  ut 
fuerant."  (Hier.  Praef.  in  Evang.)  We  find  no  prefaces  of 
Jerome,  relating  to  the  other  books  of  the  New  Testament, 
for  which  cause,  some  have  doubted  whether  he  extended  this 
emendation  beyond  the  Gospels.  As  he  speaks  in  several 
places  in  his  writings  of  his  emendation  of  the  New  Testament, 
and  declares  that  he  restored  the  New  Testament  to  the  purity 
of  the  Greek,  it  is  highly  probable  that  he  revised  the  whole 
New  Testament. 

When  Damasus  died  in  384,  Jerome  returned  to  the  East, 
and,  happening  upon  the  Hexaplar  Text  of  Origen,  at  Caesarea, 
he  made  from  that  text  a  second  emendation  of  the  Psalter, 
retaining  Origen's  diacritic  signs.  This  emendation  was  im- 
mediately received  into  liturgical  use  in  the  churches  of  Gaul ; 


THE    TARGUMS.  495 

hence,  it  came  to  be  called  the  GalHcan  Psalter.  It  gradually 
came  into  use  in  other  churches,  and  St.  Pius  V.  authorized  it 
for  the  text  of  the  Roman  Breviary.  An  exception  was  made 
in  the  case  of  the  Psalm  called  the  Invitatorium,  XCIV.  of  the 
Vulgate,  which  was  retained  from  the  Roman  Psalter.  The 
Vatican  Basilica,  the  Duomo  of  Milan,  and  the  Chapel  of  the 
Doges  of  Venice,  by  special  privilege,  retained  in  their  liturgy 
the  Roman  Psalter. 

The  Roman  Psalter  is  also  retained  in  the  Roman  Missal. 
The  Psalterium  Gallicanum  is  placed  in  the  Vulgate.  St. 
Jerome  next  revised  Job  by  the  Hexaplar  text,  which  revision 
was  received  with  much  favor  by  St.  Augustine.  We  are  cer- 
tain from  Jerome's  prefaces,  that  he  emended  in  the  same  man- 
ner Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  Canticle  of  Canticles,  and  Chronicles. 

It  is  probable  that  Jerome  also  corrected,  at  this  time  and 
in  this  manner,  the  remaining  books  of  the  Old  Testament, 
though  explicit  data  are  wanting  to  prove  it. 

Jerome  soon  after  entered  upon  the  greatest  work  of  his 
life,  the  translation  of  the  protocanonical  books  of  the  Old 
Testament,  from  the  original  Hebrew. 

Of  this  great  version  we  shall  treat  in  a  later  chapter.  Suf- 
fice it  to  say  here,  that  forth  from  the  sixth  century,  the  great 
translation  of  Jerome  displaced  the  Vetus  Itala,  so  that  the 
greater  part  of  this  old  version  perished.  Certain  portions  of 
it  are  preserved  in  the  Vulgate,  and  in  the  writings  of  the 
Fathers.  The  New  Testament  of  the  Vetus  Itala  as  emended 
by  Jerome,  the  second  emendation  of  the  Psalter,  the  books 
of  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  Baruch,  I.  and  II.  Maccabees,  and 
the  deuterocanonical  parts  of  Esther  and  Daniel,  are  retained 
from  the  Vetus  Itala  in  the  Vulgate. 

Various  collections  have  been  made  of  the  other  fragments 
of  the  Vetus  Itala  from  codices  and  works  of  Fathers.  Flami- 
nius  Nobilius  and  Agellius  were  the  first  to  collect  and  pub- 
lish these  fragments  in  1588.  Since  that  time,  fragments  have 
been  collected  and  published  by  Martianay,  Thomas  Hearne, 
Sabatier,  Blanchini ;  and  in  more  recent  times  by  Vercellone, 
Ranke,  Haupt,  and  Muenter. 

Chapter  XXII. 

The  Targums. 

The  Chaldee  word  QI^IH  T^RGUM  signifies,  in  general, 
any  version  or  explanation  ;  but  this  appellation  is  more  par- 
ticularly restricted  to  the  versions  or  paraphrases  of  the  Old 


496  THE  TARGUMS. 

Testament,  executed  in  the  East  Aramaean  or  Chaldee  dialect, 
as  it  is  usually  called.  These  Targums  are  termed  paraphrases 
or  expositions,  because  they  are  rather  comments  and  explica- 
tions, than  literal  translations  of  the  text.  They  are  written 
in  the  Chaldee  tongue,  which  became  familiar  to  the  Jews 
after  the  time  of  their  captivity  in  Babylon,  and  was  more 
known  to  them  than  the  Hebrew  itself ;  so  that,  when  the  law 
was  "  read  in  the  Synagogue  every  Sabbath  day,"  in  pure 
biblical  Hebrew,  an  explanation  was  subjoined  to  it  in  Chaldee, 
in  order  to  render  it  intelligible  to  the  people,  who  had  but  an 
imperfect  knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  language.  This  practice, 
as  already  observed,  originated  about  the  epoch  of  the  Mac- 
cabees. As  there  are  no  traces  of  any  written  Targums  prior 
to  those  of  Onkelos  and  Jonathan,  who  are  supposed  to  have 
lived  about  the  time  of  our  Saviour,  it  is  highly  probable  that 
these  paraphrases  were  at  first  merely  oral ;  that  subsequently, 
the  ordinary  glosses  on  the  more  difficult  passages  were  com- 
mitted to  writing;  and  that,  as  the  Jews  were  bound  by  an 
ordinance  of  their  elders  to  possess  a  copy  of  the  law,  these 
glosses  were  either  afterwards  collected  together  and  de- 
ficiencies in  them  supplied,  or,  new  and  connected  paraphrases 
were  formed. 

There  are  at  present  extant  ten  paraphrases  on  different 
parts  of  the  Old  Testament,  three  of  which  comprise  the 
Pentateuch,  or  five  books  of  Moses:  i. — The  Targum  of 
Onkelos;  2. — That  falsely  ascribed  to  Jonathan,  and  usually 
cited  as  the  Targum  of  the  Pseudo-Jonathan ;  and,  3. — The 
Jerusalem  Targum ;  4. — The  Targum  of  Jonathan  Ben  Uzziel 
(i.  e.,  the  son  of  Uzziel)  on  the  Prophets ;  5. — The  Targum  of 
Rabbi  Joseph  the  blind,  or  one-eyed,  on  the  Hagiographa ; 
6. — An  anonymous  Targum  on  the  five  Megilloth,  or  books  of 
Ruth,  Esther,  Ecclesiastes,  Song  of  Solomon,  and  the  Lamen- 
tations of  Jeremiah  ;  7,  8,  9. — Three  Targums  on  the  Book  of 
Esther ;  and,  10. — A  Targum  or  paraphrase  on  the  two  Books 
of  Chronicles.  These  Targums,  taken  together,  form  a  con- 
tinued paraphrase  on  the  Old  Testament,  with  the  exception 
of  the  Books  of  Daniel,  Ezra,  and  Nehemiah  (anciently  reputed 
to  be  part  of  Ezra) ;  which,  being  for  the  most  part  written  in 
Chaldee,  it  has  been  conjectured  that  no  paraphrases  were 
written  on  them,  as  being  unnecessary ;  though  Prideaux  is  of 
opinion  that  Targums  were  composed  on  these  books  also, 
which  have  perished  in  the  lapse  of  ages. 

The  language  in  which  these  paraphrases  are  composed 
varies  in  purity,  according  to  the  time  when  they  were  re- 


THE    TARGUMS.  497 

spectively  written.  Thus,  the  Targums  of  Onkelos  and  the 
Pseudo-Jonathan  are  much  purer  than  the  others,  approximat- 
ing very  nearly  to  the  Aramaean  dialect,  in  which  some  parts 
of  Daniel  and  Ezra  are  written,  except,  indeed,  that  the  ortho- 
graphy does  not  always  correspond  ;  while  the  language  of  the 
later  Targums,  whence  the  rabbinical  dialect  derives  its  source, 
is  far  more  impure,  and  is  intermixed  with  barbarous  and 
foreign  words.  Originally,  all  the  Chaldee  paraphrases  were 
written  without  vowel-points,  like  all  other  Oriental  manu- 
scripts ;  but  at  length  some  persons  ventured  to  add  points  to 
them,  though  very  erroneously,  and  this  irregular  punctuation 
was  retained  in  the  Venetian  and  other  early  editions  of  the 
Hebrew  Bible.  Some  further  imperfect  attempts  towards 
regular  pointing  were  made  both  in  the  Complutensian  and  in 
the  Antwerp  Polyglotts,  until  at  length  the  elder  Buxtorf,  in 
his  edition  of  the  Hebrew  Bible,  published  at  Basil,  undertook 
the  thankless  task  of  improving  the  punctuation  of  the  Tar- 
gums, according  to  such  rules  as  he  had  formed  from  the 
pointing,  which  he  had  found  in  the  Chaldee  parts  of  the 
Books  of  Daniel  and  Ezra ;  and  his  method  of  punctuation  is 
followed  in  Walton's  Polyglott. 

The  Targum  of  Onkelos. — It  is  not  known,  with  cer- 
tainty, at  what  time  Onkelos  flourished,  nor  of  what  nation  he 
was.  Eichorn  conjectures  that  he  was  a  native  of  Babylon, 
first,  because  he  is  mentioned  in  the  Babylonian  Talmud  y 
secondly^  because  his  dialect  is  not  the  Chaldee  spoken  in 
Palestine,  but  much  purer,  and  more  closely  resembling  the 
style  of  Daniel  and  Ezra ;  and  lastly,  because  he  has  not  inter- 
woven any  of  those  fabulous  narratives,  to  which  the  Jews  of 
Palestine  were  so  much  attached,  and  from  which  they  could 
with  difficulty  refrain.  Bauer  and  Jahn  place  him  in  the  second 
century.  The  Targum  of  Onkelos  comprises  the  Pentateuch, 
or  five  books  of  Moses,  and  is  justly  preferred  to  all  the  others, 
both  by  Jews  and  Christians,  on  account  of  the  purity  of  its 
style,  and  its  general  freedom  from  idle  legends.  It  is  rather 
a  version  than  a  paraphrase,  and  renders  the  Hebrew  text  word 
for  word,  with  so  much  accuracy  and  exactness  that,  being  set 
to  the  same  musical  notes  with  the  original  Hebrew,  it  could 
be  read  or  cantillated  in  the  same  tone  as  the  latter  in  the 
public  assemblies  of  the  Jews.  And  this,  we  find,  was  the 
practice  of  the  Jews  up  to  the  time  of  Rabbi  Elias  Levita,  who 
flourished  in  the  early  part  of  the  sixteenth  century,  and  who 
expressly  states  that  the  Jews  read  the  law  in  their  synagogues, 
first  in  Hebrew  and  then  in  the  Targum  of  Onkelos.     This 

FF 


498  THE    TARGUMS. 

Targum  has  been  translated  into  Latin  by  Alfonso  de  Zamora, 
Paulus  Fagius,  Bernardinus  Baldus,  and  Andrea  de  Leon  of 
Zamora. 

The  second  Targum,  which  is  a  more  liberal  paraphrase  of 
the  Pentateuch  than  the  preceding,  is  usually  called  the 
Targum  of  the  Pseudo-Jonathan,  being  ascribed  by  many 
to  Jonathan  Ben  Uzziel,  who  wrote  the  much-esteemed  para- 
phrase on  the  Prophets.  But  the  difference  in  the  style  and 
diction  of  this  Targum,  which  is  very  impure,  as  well  as  in  the 
method  of  paraphrasing  adopted  in  it,  clearly  proves  that  it 
could  not  have  been  written  by  Jonathan  Ben  Uzziel,  who, 
indeed,  sometimes  indulges  in  allegories,  and  has  introduced  a 
few  barbarisms ;  but  this  Targum  on  the  law  abounds  with  the 
most  idle  Jewish  legends  that  can  well  be  conceived ;  which, 
together  with  the  barbarous  and  foreign  words  it  contains, 
render  it  of  very  little  utility.  From  its  mentioning  the  six 
parts  of  the  Talmud  (on  Exod.  XX VL  9),  which  compilation 
was  not  written  till  two  centuries  after  the  birth  of  Christ ; — 
Constantinople  (on  Numb.  XXIV.  19),  which  city  was  always 
called  Byzantium  until  it  received  its  name  from  Constantine 
the  Great,  in  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century ;  the  Lom- 
bards (on  Numb.  XXIV.  24),  whose  first  irruption  into  Italy 
did  not  take  place  until  the  year  570;  and  the  Turks  (on  Gen. 
X.  2),  who  did  not  become  conspicuous  till  the  middle  of  the 
sixth  century, — learned  men  are  unanimously  of  opinion  that 
this  Targum  of  the  Pseudo-Jonathan  could  not  have  been 
written  before  the  seventh,  or  even  the  eighth  century.  It  was 
probably  compiled  from  older  interpretations.  This  Chaldee 
paraphrase  was  translated  into  Latin  by  Anthony  Ralph  de 
Chevalier,  in  the  sixteenth  century. 

The  Jerusalem  Targum,  which  also  paraphrases  the  five 
Books  of  Moses,  derives  its  name  from  the  dialect  in  which  it 
is  composed.  It  is  by  no  means  a  connected  paraphrase,  some- 
times omitting  whole  verses,  or  even  chapters  ;  at  other  times 
explaining  only  a  single  word  of  a  verse,  of  which  it  sometimes 
gives  a  twofold  interpretation ;  and  at  other  times  Hebrew 
words  are  inserted  without  any  explanation  whatever.  In  many 
respects,  it  corresponds  with  the  paraphrase  of  the  Pseudo- 
Jonathan,  whose  legendary  tales  are  here  frequently  repeated, 
abridged,  or  expanded.  From  the  impurity  of  its  style,  and 
the  number  of  Greek,  Latin,  and  Persian  words  which  it  con- 
tains, Walton,  Carpzov,  Wolfius,  and  many  other  eminent 
philologers,  are  of  opinion  that  it  is  a  compilation  by  several 
authors,  and  consists  of  extracts  and  collections.     From  these 


THE  TARGUMS.  499 

internal  evidences,  the  commencement  of  the  seventh  century- 
has  been  assigned  as  its  probable  date ;  but  it  is  more  likely 
not  to  have  been  written  before  the  eighth,  or  perhaps  the 
ninth  century.  This  Targum  was  also  translated  into  Latin 
by  Chevalier  and  by  Francis  Taylor. 

The  Targum  of  Jonathan  Ben  Uzziel. — According  to 
the  Talmudical  traditions,  the  author  of  this  paraphrase  was 
chief  of  the  eighty  distinguished  scholars  of  Rabbi  Hillel,  the 
elder,  and  a  fellow  disciple  of  Simeon  the  Just,  who  bore  the 
infant  Messiah  in  his  arms ;  consequently  he  would  be  nearly 
contemporary  with  Onkelos.  Wolfius,  however,  adopts  the 
opinion  of  Prideaux,  that  he  flourished  a  short  time  before  the 
birth  of  Christ,  and  compiled  the  work  which  bears  his  name 
from  more  ancient  Targums,  that  had  been  preserved  to  his 
time  by  oral  tradition.  From  the  silence  of  Origen  and  Jerome 
concerning  this  Targum,  of  which  they  could  not  but  have 
availed  themselves  if  it  had  really  existed  in  their  time,  and 
also  from  its  being  cited  in  the  Talmud,  both  Bauer  and  Jahn 
date  it  much  later  than  is  generally  admitted  ;  the  former,  in- 
deed, is  of  opinion  that  its  true  date  cannot  be  ascertained ; 
and  the  latter,  from  the  inequalities  of  style  and  method 
observable  in  it,  considers  it  as  a  compilation  from  the  inter- 
pretations of  several  learned  men,  made  about  the  close  of  the 
third  or  fourth  century.  This  paraphrase  treats  of  the 
Prophets,  that  is  (according  to  the  Jewish  classification  of  the 
sacred  writings),  of  the  Books  of  Joshua,  Judges,  I.  and  II. 
Samuel,  I.  and  II.  Kings,  who  are  termed  the  former  prophets; 
and  of  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  and  the  twelve  minor 
prophets,  who  are  designated  as  the  latter  prophets.  Though 
the  style  of  this  Targum  is  not  so  pure  and  elegant  as  that  of 
Onkelos,  yet  it  is  not  disfigured  by  those  legendary  tales  and 
numerous  foreign  and  barbarous  words  which  abound  in  the 
latter  Targums.  Both  the  language  and  method  of  interpreta- 
tion, however,  are  irregular.  In  the  exposition  of  the  former 
prophets,  the  text  is  more  closely  rendered  than  in  that  on  the 
latter,  which  is  less  accurate,  as  well  as  more  paraphrastical, 
and  interspersed  with  some  traditions  and  fabulous  legends. 
In  order  to  attach  the  greater  authority  to  the  Targum  of 
Jonathan  Ben  Uzziel,  the  Jews,  not  satisfied  with  making  him 
contemporary  with  the  prophets  Malachi,  Zachariah,  and 
Haggai,  and  asserting  that  he  received  it  from  their  lips,  have 
related  that  while  Jonathan  was  composing  his  paraphrase, 
there  was  an  earthquake  for  forty  leagues  around  him ;  and 
that  if  any  bird  happened  to  pass  over  him,  or  a  fly  alighted 


500  THE   TARGUMS. 

on  his  paper  while  writing,  they  were  immediately  con- 
sumed by  fire  from  heaven,  without  any  injury  being 
sustained  either  by  his  person  or  his  paper.  The  whole 
of  this  Targum  was  translated  into  Latin  by  Alfonso  de 
Zamora,  Andrea  de  Leon,  and  Conrad  Pellican ;  and  the 
paraphrase  on  the  twelve  minor  prophets,  by  Immanuel 
Tremellius. 

The  Targum  on  the  Cetubim,  Hagiographa,  or  Holy 
Writings,  is  ascribed  by  some  Jewish  writers  to  Rab  Jose,  or 
Rabbi  Joseph,  surnamed  the  one-eyed,  or  blind,  who  is  said  to 
have  been  at  the  head  of  the  academy  at  Sora,  in  the  third 
century;  though  others  affirm  that  its  author  is  unknown. 
The  style  is  barbarous,  impure,  and  very  unequal,  interspersed 
with  numerous  digressions  and  legendary  narratives ;  on  which 
account  the  younger  Buxtorf,  and  after  him  Bauer  and  Jahn, 
are  of  opinion  that  the  whole  is  a  compilation  of  later  times ; 
and  this  sentiment  appears  to  be  the  most  correct.  Prideaux 
characterizes  its  language  as  the  most  corrupt  Chaldee  of  the 
Jerusalem  dialect.  The  translators  of  the  preceding  Targum, 
together  with  Arias  Montanus,  have  given  a  Latin  version  of 
this  Targum. 

The  Targum  on  the  Megilloth,  or  five  Books  of  Eccle- 
siastes.  Song  of  Songs,  Lamentations  of  Jeremiah,  Ruth,  and 
Esther,  is  evidently  a  compilation  by  several  persons ;  the 
barbarism  of  its  style,  numerous  digressions,  and  idle  legends 
which  are  inserted,  all  concur  to  prove  it  to  be  of  late  date, 
and  certainly  not  earlier  than  the  sixth  century.  The  para- 
phrase on  the  Book  of  Ruth  and  the  Lamentations  of  Jeremiah 
is  the  best  executed  portion.  Ecclesiastes  is  more  freely 
paraphrased,  but  the  text  of  the  Song  of  Solomon  is  absolutely 
lost  amidst  the  diffuse  circumscription  of  its  author,  and  his 
dull  glosses  and  fabulous  additions. 

The  Three  Targums  on  the  Book  of  Esther. — This 
book  has  always  been  held  in  the  highest  estimation  by  the 
Jews,  which  circumstance  induced  them  to  translate  it  repeat- 
edly into  the  Chaldee  dialect.  Three  paraphrases  on  it  have 
been  printed ;  one  in  the  Antwerp  Polyglott,  which  is  much 
shorter  and  contains  fewer  digressions  than  the  others; 
another  in  Walton's  Polyglott,  which  is  more  diiTuse,  and 
comprises  more  numerous  Jewish  fables  and  traditions;  and  a 
third,  of  which  a  Latin  version  was  published  by  Francis 
Taylor,  and  which,  according  to  Carpzov,  is  more  stupid  and 
diffuse  than  any  of  the  preceding.  They  are  all  three  of  very 
late  date. 


THE    TARGUMS.  601 

A  Targum  on  the  Books  of  Chronicles,  which  for  a 
long  time  was  unknown  both  to  Jews  and  Christians,  was  dis- 
covered in  the  library  at  Erfurt,  belonging  to  the  ministers  of 
the  Augsburg  confession,  by  Matthias  Frederick  Beck,  who 
published  it  in  1680-3-4,  in  two  quarto  volumes.  Another 
edition  was  published  at  Amsterdam  by  David  Wilkins  (171 5, 
4to.),  from  a  manuscript  in  the  University  Library  at  Cam- 
bridge. It  is  more  complete  than  Beck's  edition,  and  supplies 
many  of  its  de6ciencies.  This  Targum,  however,  is  of  very 
little  value ;  like  all  the  other  Chaldee  paraphrases,  it  blends 
legendary  tales  with  the  narrative. 

Of  all  the  Chaldee  paraphrases  above  noticed,  the  Targums 
of  Onkelos  and  Jonathan  Ben  Uzziel  are  most  highly  valued 
by  the  Jews,  who  implicitly  receive  their  expositions  of  doubt- 
ful passages.  Shickhard,  Mayer,  Helvicus,  Leusden,  Hottinger, 
and  Prideaux,  have  conjectured  that  some  Chaldee  Targum 
was  in  use  in  the  Synagogue  where  our  Lord  read  Isaiah  LXI. 
I,  2  (Luke  IV.  17-19) ;  and  that  he  quoted  Psal.  XXII.  i,  when 
on  the  cross  (Matth.  XXVII.  46),  not  out  of  the  Hebrew  text, 
but  out  of  a  Chaldee  paraphrase.  But  there  does  not  appear  to 
be  sufficient  ground  for  this  hypothesis ;  for  as  the  Chaldee  or 
East  Aramaean  dialect  was  spoken  at  Jerusalem,  it  is  at  least 
as  probable  that  Jesus  Christ  interpreted  the  Hebrew  into  the 
vernacular  dialect  in  the  first  instance,  as  that  he  should  have 
read  from  a  Targum  ;  and,  when  on  the  cross,  it  was  perfectly 
natural  that  he  should  speak  in  the  same  language,  rather  than 
in  the  Biblical  Hebrew,  which,  we  have  already  seen,  was 
cultivated  and  studied  by  the  priests  and  Levites,  as  a  learned 
language.  The  Targum  of  Rabbi  Joseph  the  Blind,  in  which 
the  words  cited  by  our  Lord  are  to  be  found,  is  so  long  posterior 
to  the  time  of  his  crucifixion,  that  it  cannot  be  received  as 
evidence.  So  numerous,  indeed,  are  the  variations,  and  so 
arbitrary  are  the  alterations  occurring  in  the  manuscripts  of 
the  Chaldee  paraphrases,  that  Kennicott  has  sought  to  prove 
them  to  have  been  designedly  altered  in  compliment  to  the 
previously  corrupted  copies  of  the  Hebrew  text ;  or,  in  other 
words,  that  "  alterations  have  been  made  wilfully  in  the 
Chaldee  paraphrase  to  render  that  paraphrase,  in  some  places, 
more  conformable  to  the  words  of  the  Hebrew  text,  where 
those  Hebrew  words  are  supposed  to  be  right,  but  had  them- 
selves been  corrupted."  But  notwithstanding  all  their  de- 
ficiencies and  interpolations,  the  Targums,  especially  those  of 
Onkelos  and  Jonathan,  are  of  considerable  importance  in  the 
interpretation  of  the  Scriptures,  not  only  as  they  supply  the 


602  THE  SYRIAC  VERSIONS. 

meanings  of  words  or  phrases  occurring  but  once  in  the  Old 
Testament,  but  also  because  they  reflect  considerable  light  on 
the  Jewish  rites,  ceremonies,  laws,  customs,  usages,  etc.,  men- 
tioned or  alluded  to  in  both  Testaments.  But  it  is  in  estab- 
lishing the  genuine  meaning  of  particular  prophecies  relative 
to  the  Messiah,  in  opposition  to  the  false  explications  of  the 
Jews  and  Anti-trinitarians,  that  these  Targums  are  preemi- 
nently useful. 

Chapter  XXIII. 

The  Syriac  Versions. 

Syria  being  visited  at  a  very  early  period  by  the  preachers 
of  the  Christian  faith,  several  translations  of  the  sacred  volume 
were  made  into  the  language  of  that  country. 

The  most  celebrated  of  these,  is  the  Peschito  or  Literal 
(Versio  Simplex),  as  it  is  usually  called,  on  account  of  its 
very  close  adherence  to  the  Hebrew  and  Greek  texts,  from 
which  it  was  immediately  made.  The  most  extravagant  as- 
sertions have  been  advanced  concerning  its  antiquity ;  some 
referring  the  translation  of  the  Old  Testament  to  the  time  of 
Solomon  and  Hiram,  while  others  ascribe  it  to  Asa,  priest 
of  the  Samaritans ;  and  a  third  class,  to  the  apostle  Thaddeus. 
This  last  tradition  is  received  by  the  Syrian  churches ;  but  a 
more  recent  date  is  ascribed  to  it  by  modern  biblical  philolo- 
gers.  Walton,  Carpzov,  Leusden,  Lowth,  and  Kennicott,  fix 
its  date  to  the  first  century ;  Bauer  and  some  other  German 
critics,  to  the  second  or  third  century ;  Jahn  fixes  it,  at  the 
latest,  to  the  second  century ;  De  Rossi  pronounces  it  to  be 
very  ancient,  but  does  not  specify  any  precise  date.  The 
most  probable  opinion  is  that  of  Michaelis,  who  ascribes  the 
Syriac  version  of  both  Testaments  to  the  close  of  the  first,  or 
to  the  earlier  part  of  the  second  century,  at  which  time  the 
Syrian  churches  flourished  most,  and  the  Christians  at  Edessa 
had  a  temple  for  divine  worship  erected  after  the  model  of 
that  at  Jerusalem ;  and  it  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  they 
would  be  without  a  version  of  the  Old  Testament,  the  reading 
of  which  had  been  introduced  by  the  Apostles. 

The  Old  Testament  was  evidently  translated  from  the 
original  Hebrew,  to  which  it  most  closely  and  literally  adheres, 
with  the  exception  of  a  few  passages  which  appear  to  bear  some 
affinity  to  the  Septuagint ;  Jahn  accounts  for  this  by  suppos- 
ing, either  that  this  version  was  consulted  by  the  Syriac  tran- 
slator or  translators,  or  that  the  Syrians  afterwards  corrected 


THE  SYRIAC  VERSIONS.  603 

their  translation  by  the  Septuagint.  Credner,  who  has  par- 
ticularly investigated  the  minor  prophets,  according  to  this 
version,  is  of  opinion  that  the  translator  of  the  Old  Testament 
for  the  most  part  followed  the  Hebrew  text,  but  at  the  same 
time  consulted  the  Chaldee  Paraphrase  and  Septuagint  Version, 
Leusden  conjectures,  that  the  translator  did  not  make  use  of  the 
most  correct  Hebrew  manuscripts,  and  has  given  some  examples 
which  appear  to  support  his  opinion.  Dathe,  however,  speaks 
most  positively  in  favor  of  its  antiquity  and  fidelity,  and  refers 
to  the  Syriac  version,  as  a  certain  standard  by  which  we  may 
judge  of  the  state  of  the  Hebrew  text,  in  the  second  century; 
and  both  Dr.  Kennicott  and  Professor  De  Rossi  have  derived 
many  valuable  readings  from  this  version.  De  Rossi,  indeed, 
prefers  it  to  all  the  other  ancient  versions,  and  says,  that  it 
closely  follows  the  order  of  the  sacred  text,  rendering  word 
for  word,  and  is  more  pure  than  any  other.  As  it  is  therefore 
probable,  that  the  Syriac  version  was  made  about  the  end  of 
the  first  century,  it  might  be  made  from  Hebrew  MSS.  almost 
as  old  as  those  which  were  before  transcribed  into  Greek,  and 
from  MSS.  which  might  be  in  some  places  true  where  the 
others  were  corrupted  And  it  will  be  no  wonder  at  all,  if  a 
version  so  very  ancient  should  have  preserved  a  great  variety 
of  true  readings,  where  the  Hebrew  manuscripts  were  corrupted 
afterwards.  Boothroyd  considers  this  version  to  be  as  ancient, 
and  in  many  respects  as  valuable,  as  the  Chaldee  Para- 
phrase ;  and  in  the  notes  to  his  edition  of  the  Hebrew  Bible  he 
has  shown  that  this  version  has  retained  numerous  and  im- 
portant various  readings.  To  its  general  fidelity  almost  every 
critic  of  note  bears  unqualified  approbation,  although  it  is  not 
everywhere  equal ;  and  it  is  remarkably  clear  and  strong  in 
those  passages  which  attribute  characters  of  Deity  to  the  Mes- 
siah. Michaelis  and  Jahn  have  observed,  that  a  different 
method  of  interpretation  is  adopted  in  the  Pentateuch,  from 
that  which  is  to  be  found  in  the  Book  of  Chronicles ;  and  Jahn 
has  remarked  that  there  are  some  Chaldee  words  in  the  first 
chapter  of  Genesis,  and  also  in  the  Book  of  Ecclesiastes  and 
the  Song  of  Solomon ;  whence  they  infer  that  this  version  was 
the  work  not  of  one,  but  of  several  authors.  Further, 
Michaelis  has  discovered  traces  of  the  religion  of  the  translator, 
which  indicate  a  Christian,  and  no  Jew.  A  Jew  by  religion 
would  have  used  the  Chaldee  Targums  more  copiously  than 
is  observed  in  most  books  of  the  Syriac  Old  Testament. 
This  a  Jew  by  birth  would  have  done,  if  even  he  had  been 
converted  to  Christianity,  and,  as  most  of  the  books  of  the 


604  THE  SYRIAC  VERSIONS. 

Syriac  Bible  thus  evince  that  the  interpreter  had  no  acquaint- 
ance with  the  Targums,  Michaelis  (whose  opinion  is  adopted 
by  Gesenius)  is  of  the  opinion  that  the  translator  was  a 
Christian  ;  and  their  judgment  is  corroborated  by  the  fact  that 
the  arguments  prefixed  to  the  Psalms  were  manifestly  written 
by  a  Christian  author. 

The  Syriac  version  of  the  New  Testament  comprises  only 
the  four  Gospels,  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  the  Epistles  to  Saint 
Paul  (including  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews),  the  First  Epistle 
to  Saint  John,  Saint  Peter's  First  Epistle,  and  the  Epistle  of 
Saint  James.  The  celebrated  passage  in  I.  John,  V.  7.  and  the 
history  of  the  woman  taken  in  adultery  (John  VIII.  2 — 11), 
are  both  wanting.  All  the  Christian  sects  in  Syria  and  the 
East  make  use  of  this  version  exclusively,  which  they  hold  in 
the  highest  estimation.  It  agrees  with  the  Constantinopolitan 
recension.  Michaelis  pronounces  it  to  be  the  very  best  trans- 
lation of  the  Greek  Testament  which  he  ever  read,  for  the  gen- 
eral ease,  elegance,  and  fidelity  with  which  it  has  been  executed. 
It  retains,  however,  many  Greek  words,  which  might  have  been 
easily  and  correctly  expressed  in  Syriac;  in  Matth.  XXVII. 
alone  there  are  not  fewer  than  eleven  words.  In  like  manner, 
some  Latin  words  have  been  retained  which  the  authors  of  the 
New  Testament  had  borrowed  from  the  Roman  manners  and 
customs.  This  version  also  presents  some  mistakes,  which 
can  only  be  explained  by  the  words  of  the  Greek  text,  from 
which  it  was  immediately  made. 

The  first  edition  of  the  Syriac  version  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment appeared  in  the  Paris  Polyglott ;  but,  being  taken  from 
an  imperfect  MS.,  its  deficiencies  were  supplied  by  Gabriel 
Sionita,  who  translated  the  passages  wanting  from  the  Latin 
Vulgate,  and  has  been  unjustly  charged  with  having  translated 
the  whole  from  the  Vulgate.  This  text  was  reprinted  in 
Walton's  Polyglott,  with  the  addition  of  some  apocryphal  books. 

The  Peschito  Syriac  version  of  the  New  Testament  was  first 
made  known  in  Europe  by  Moses  of  Mardin,  who  had  been  sent 
by  Ignatius,  patriarch  of  the  Maronite  Christians,  in  1552,  to 
Pope  Julius  III.,  to  acknowledge  the  papal  supremacy  in  the 
name  of  the  Syrian  church,  and  was  at  the  same  time  commis- 
sioned to  procure  a  printed  text  of  the  Syriac  New  Testament. 
This  was  accomplished  at  Vienna  in  1555,  under  the  editorial 
care  of  Moses  and  Albert  Widmanstad,  with  the  assistance  of 
William  Postell,  and  at  the  expense  of  the  Emperor  Ferdinand 
I.  This  Editio  Princeps  is  in  quarto.  The  Syriac  New  Testa- 
ment has  since  been  printed  several  times. 


THE  SYRIAC  VERSIONS.  506 

There  is  also  extant  a  Syriac  version  of  the  Second  Epistle 
of  Saint  Peter,  the  Second  and  Third  Epistles  of  John,  the 
Epistle  of  Jude,  and  the  Apocalypse,  which  are  wanting  in  the 
Peschito :  these  are  by  some  writers  ascribed  to  Mar  Abba, 
primate  of  the  East  between  the  years  535  and  552,  The 
translation  of  these  books  is  made  from  the  original  Greek ; 
but  the  author,  whoever  he  was,  possessed  but  an  indifferent 
knowledge  of  the  two  languages. 

The  Philoxenian  or  Syro-Philoxenian  Version,  derives 
its  name  from  Philoxenus,  or  Xenayas,  Bishop  of  Hierapolis 
in  Syria,  A.  D.  488 — 518,  who  employed  his  rural  bishop 
{Chorepiscopus)  Polycarp,  to  translate  the  Greek  New  Tes- 
tament into  Syriac.  This  version  was  finished  in  the  year 
508,  and  was  afterwards  revised  by  Thomas  of  Harkel,  or 
Heraclea,  A.  D.  616.  Michaelis  is  of  opinion,  that  there  was  a 
third  edition ;  and  a  fourth  is  attributed  to  Dionysius  Barsali- 
baeus,  who  was  bishop  of  Amida  from  1166  to  1177.  It  ap- 
pears, however,  that  there  were  only  two  editions — the  original 
one  by  Polycarp,  and  that  revised  by  Thomas  of  Harkel ;  the 
single  copy  of  the  Four  Gospels,  with  the  alterations  of  Bar- 
salibaeus,  in  the  twelfth  century,  being  hardly  entitled  to  the 
name  of  a  new  edition.  This  version  agrees  with  the  Con- 
stantinopolitan  recension.  It  was  not  known  in  Europe  until 
the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century;  when  Ridley  published 
a  Dissertation  on  the  Syriac  Versions  of  the  New  Testatment 
(in  1 761),  three  manuscripts  of  which  he  had  received  thirty 
years  before  from  Amida  in  Mesopotamia. 

The  Philoxenian  version,  though  made  immediately  from 
the  Greek,  is  greatly  inferior  to  the  Peschito,  both  in  the  ac- 
curacy with  which  it  is  executed,  and  also  in  its  style.  It  is, 
however,  not  devoid  of  value,  "  and  is  of  real  importance  to  a 
critic,  whose  object  is  to  select  a  variety  of  readings,  with  a 
view  of  restoring  the  genuine  text  of  the  Greek  original :  for 
he  may  be  fully  assured,  that  every  phrase  and  expression  is  a 
precise  copy  of  the  Greek  text  as  it  stood  in  the  manuscript 
from  which  the  version  was  made.  But,  as  it  is  not  prior  to 
the  sixth  century,  and  the  Peschito  was  written  either  at  the 
«nd  of  the  first,  or  at  the  beginning  of  the  second  century,  it 
is  of  less  importance  to  know  the  readings  of  the  Greek  manu- 
script that  was  used  in  the  former,  than  those  of  the  original 
employed  in  the  latter."  (Michaelis's  Introd.  to  the  New  Test, 
vol.  II.  part  I.  p.  68.) 

The  Karkaphensian  Version,  as  it  is  commonly  termed, 
is  a  recension  of  the  Peschito,  or  old  Syriac  version  of  the  Old 


506  THE   SYRIAC   VERSIONS. 

and  New  Testaments,  executed  towards  the  close  of  the  tenth 
century,  by  David,  a  Jacobite  monk,  residing  in  the  monastery 
of  St.  Aaron,  on  mount  Sigara  in  Mesopotamia,  whence  is  de- 
rived the  appellation  Karkaphensian,  {Karkupho  signifying  the 
"head,"  and  also  the  "summit  of  a  mountain.")  We  are  in- 
formed by  the  learned  Card.  Wiseman,  who  has  most 
minutely  investigated  the  history  and  literary  character  of  this 
recension,  that  the  basis  of  its  text  is  the  Peschito  or  Versio 
Simplex,  with  the  printed  copies  of  which  it  bears  a  close 
affinity ;  except  that  proper  names  and  Graeco-Syriac  words  are 
accommodated  to  the  Greek  orthography,  or  to  that  adopted 
by  Thomas  of  Harkel,  in  his  revision  of  the  Philoxenian  version. 
Some  eminent  critics  have  thought  that  the  Karkaphensian 
version  was  made  for  the  use  of  the  Nestorians ;  Card.  Wiseman, 
however,  is  decidedly  of  opinion,  that  it  is  of  Monophysite  or 
Jacobite  origin.* 

The  Syro-Estrangelo  version,  also  called  the  SvRlAC 
Hexaplar,  is  a  translation  of  Origen's  Hexaplar  edition  of  the 
Greek  Septuagint ;  it  was  executed  in  the  former  part  of  the 
seventh  century,  and  its  author  is  unknown.  The  late  Profes- 
sor De  Rossi,  who  published  the  first  specimen  of  it  at  Parma, 
in  1778,  does  not  decide  whether  it  is  to  be  attributed  to  Mar- 
Abba,  James  of  Edessa,  Paul  Bishop  of  Tela,  or  to  Thomas  of 
Heraclea.  Assemanni  ascribes  it  to  Thomas,  though  other 
learned  men  affirm  that  he  did  no  more  than  collate  the  books 
of  Scripture.  This  version,  however,  corresponds  exactly  with 
the  text  of  the  Septuagint,  especially  in  those  passages  in 
which  the  latter  differs  from  the  Hebrew.  A  MS.  of  this  ver- 
sion is  in  the  Ambrosian  Library  at  Milan,  comprising  the 
Books  of  Psalms,  Job,  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  Song  of  Solo- 
mon, Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus,  Hosea,  Amos,  Habakkuk,  Zeph- 
aniah,  Haggai,  Zachariah,  Malachi,  Jeremiah,  Daniel,  and 
Isaiah ;  it  also  contains  the  obelus  and  other  marks  of  Origen's 
Hexapla ;  and  a  subscription  at  the  end  states  it  to  have  been 
taken  from  the  exemplar  of  Eusebius  and  Pamphilus,  after  the 
copy  of  that  exemplar  which  they  corrected  from  the  Hexapla 
of  Origen,  which  was  deposited  in  the  library  of  Caesarea. 

The  Curetonian  Syriac  is  so  named  from  its  editor  Wil- 
liam Cureton. 

In  1842,  Tattam  brought  from  the  an  Eastern  monastery 
several  manuscripts.  Out  of  these  MSS.  Cureton  picked  out 
eighty-two  leaves  and  a  half  of  a  Syriac  MS.   containing  por- 

*Card.  Wiseman's  Horae  Syriacse,  torn.  I.  pp.  236-240,  compared  with  pp. 
162,  163. 


THE  COPTIC  VERSIONS.  607 

tions  of  the  Gospels.  "  They  are  in  quarto,  with  two  columns 
on  a  page,  in  a  bold  hand,  and  Estrangelo  or  old  Syriac  char- 
acter, on  vellum  originally  very  white,  the  single  points  for 
stops,  some  titles,  &c.  being  in  red  ink ;  and  there  are  no  marks 
of  Church-lessons  by  the  first  hand,  which  Cureton  assigns  to 
the  middle  of  the  fifth  century.  The  fragments  contain  Matth. 
I.  I— VIII.  22;  X.  32— XXIII.  25  ;  Mark  XVI.  17—20;  John 
I.  I— 42;  III.  6— VII.  37;  XIV,  10—12;  16—18;  19—23; 
26—29;  Luke  II,  48— III.  16;  VII.  33— XV.  21;  XVII. 
24 — XXIV.  44,  or  1786  verses,  so  arranged  that  St.  Mark's 
Gospel  is  immediately  followed  by  St.  John's.  The  Syriac 
text  was  printed  in  fine  Estrangelo  type  in  1848,  and  freely 
imparted  to  such  scholars  as  might  need  its  help  ;  it  was  not 
till  1858  that  the  work  was  published,  with  a  very  literal  trans- 
lation into  rather  bald  English,  a  beautiful  and  ^^■a.zX.  facsimile 
by  Mrs.  Cureton,  and  a  Preface,  full  of  interesting  or  startling 
matter,  which  has  been  criticised  in  no  friendly  tone.  Indeed, 
the  difficult  but  unavoidable  investigation  into  the  relation  his 
new  version  bears  to  the  Peschito,  has  been  further  complicated 
by  Cureton 's  persuasion  that  he  had  discovered  in  these  Syriac 
fragments  a  text  of  St.  Matthew's  Gospel  that  '  to  a  great  ex- 
tent, has  retained  the  identical  terms  and  expressions  which 
the  Apostle  himself  employed ;  and  that  we  have  here,  in  our 
Lord's  discourses,  to  a  great  extent  the  very  same  words  as 
the  Divine  Author  of  our  holy  religion  himself  uttered,  in  pro- 
claiming the  glad  tidings  of  salvation  in  the  Hebrew  dia- 
lect -5^  *  *  * ;  that  here  in  fact  we  have  to  a  great  extent  the  ori- 
ginal of  that  Hebrew  Gospel  of  St.  Matthew  of  which  the 
canonical  Greek  Gospel  is  but  a  translation.  It  is  beside  our 
present  purpose  to  examine  in  detail  the  arguments  of  Dr. 
Cureton  on  this  head,  and  it  would  be  the  less  necessary  in  any 
case,  since  they  seem  to  have  convinced  no  one  save  himself." 
(Scrivener,  op.  cit.) 

Chapter  XXIV. 

The  Egyptian  or  Coptic  Versions. 

The  Coptic  language  is  derived  from  the  old  Egyptian 
tongue  with  numerous  Greek  words  intermingled.  This  lan- 
guage did  not  cease  to  be  spoken  in  Egypt,  until  towards  the 
middle  of  the  XVII.  century.  The  study  of  the  Coptic  litera- 
ture is  at  present  in  a  very  imperfect  state.  Learned  men  have 
been  studying  the  language  for  over  two  centuries,  but  much 
of  that  study  was  given  to  the  Hieroglyphs,  and  the  impor- 


508  THE   COPTIC   VERSIONS. 

tance  of  studying  the  Coptic  Bible,  has  only  recently  been 
realized.  The  great  decadence  of  learning  among  the  Copts, 
the  neglect  into  which  their  sacred  books  had  fallen,  rendered 
the  study  difficult,  and  its  results  uncertain,  and  unsatisfactory. 
The  Coptic  MSS.  are  in  a  very  bad  condition,  and  we  can  not 
hope  to  give  a  full  treatise  on  this  subject  in  the  present  con- 
dition of  the  science.  We  are  indebted  for  much  of  the  present 
data  to  M.  Hyvernat,  of  Washington  University. 

The  Coptic  language  existed  in  several  important  dialects, 
of  which  the  first  is  the  BOHAIRIC.  This  name  is  derived  from 
Bohairah,  the  Arabic  name  for  Lower  Egypt.  It  was  spoken 
principally  in  the  Delta  of  the  Nile,  and  at  Alexandria,  and,  for 
a  time,  was  the  only  Egyptian  language  known  to  Europeans, 
who  called  it  simply  the  Coptic  tongue.  Later,  it  was  called 
the  Memphitic,  in  contradistinction  to  the  Thebaic  dialect. 
The  term  Memphitic  applied  to  this  language,  is  incorrect ;  for 
it  was  only  in  later  times,  when  the  Coptic  patriarchs  trans- 
ferred their  seat  from  Alexandria  to  Cairo,  that  it  spread  at 
Memphis.  The  usage  of  the  best  scholars  is  to  call  it  Bo- 
hairic. 

The  Sahidic  dialect  is  derived  from  Es-Sahid,  the  Arabic 
designation  of  Upper  Egypt.  It  was  at  one  time  spoken 
through  all  Upper  Egypt.  It  has  been  called  Thebaic  form 
Thebes,  the  capital  of  Upper  Egypt,  but  it  is  uncertain, 
whether  the  tongue  originated  at  Thebes,  and  it  is  more  scien- 
tific to  call  it  Sahidic,  until  new  discoveries  may  bring  forth  a 
more  correct  appellation. 

Much  uncertainty  prevails  regarding  the  third  dialect, 
which  current  usage  calls  the  Fayoumian.  It  was  discovered 
by  Giorgi  (Frag.  Evang.  Joh.  Graeco-Copto-Thebaicum,  Rome, 
1789).  He  termed  it  Ammonian,  believing  that  it  had  been 
spoken  in  the  Oasis  of  Ammon.  According  to  Quatrem^re, 
it  was  spoken  in  the  greater  and  minor  Oasis.  Zoega  calls  it 
the  Bashmuric,  while  Stern  denies  the  identity  between  the 
Fayoumian  and  the  Bashmuric. 

There  was  a  dialect  spoken  in  middle  Egypt  in  the  pro- 
vince of  Memphis,  when  this  city  had  a  certain  importance,  to 
which  the  name  of  Memphitic  would  rightly  belong,  were  it 
not  for  fear  of  confounding  it  with  the  Bohairic.  It  was  first 
made  known  by  the  publication  in  1878  in  Paris,  by  M.  Revillout 
of  some  documents  on  Papyrus  coming  from  the  old  monastery 
of  St.  Jeremias,  near  Serapeum. 

The  fifth  dialect  is  made  known  from  some  fragments 
found    in    the    excavations    of    the    cemetery   of    Akhmim, 


THE   COPTIC   VERSIONS.  509 

the  ancient  Chemmis  or  Panopolis;  M.  Bouriant  who  first 
published  these  fragments  has  termed  this  dialect  the 
Bashmuric. 

By  strong  proper  characteristics  we  can  divide  these  dia- 
lects into  Northern  and  Southern.  The  Northern  dialect  is 
represented  by  the  Bohairic,  the  other  four  dialects  are 
grouped  in  the  Southern  family,  of  which  the  Sahidic  bears  the 
greatest  divergency  from  the  Bohairic. 

Concerning  the  antiquity  of  these  dialects  the  data  is  very 
uncertain. 

Athanasius,  Bishop  of  Kos,  in  the  XL  century  testifies, 
that  the  Bohairic  and  Sahidic  alone  possessed  literary  impor- 
tance in  his  age.  In^that  epoch,  the  monophysite  patriarchs 
moved  their  seat  from  Alexandria  to  Cairo,  through  which 
cause  their  tongue,  the  Bohairic  dialect,  began  to  prevail  over 
the  Sahidic,  which  latter  receded  further  southward.  The 
Sahidic  had  at  that^date  absorbed  the  other  Southern  dialects, 
but  was  itself  in  a  state  of  decadence  owing  to  the  ascendancy 
of  the  Arabic  in  all  Egypt.  Thus  the  Bohairic  became  the 
sole  sacred  tongue  of  all  Egypt.  The  Arabic  has  now  almost 
entirely  supplanted  it  as  the  spoken  language  of  the  people. 

M.  Hyvernat  declares  that  he  knows  of  no  existing  com- 
plete Bohairic  version  of  Scripture. 

Quatrem^re  (Recherches,  pp.  Ii8)  testifies  that  Marcel  pos- 
sessed a  copy  of  such  Version  made  at  Cairo,  by  the  Patriarch 
of  the  See  from  old  Coptic  MSS.  After  the  death  of  Marcel, 
this  copy  was  bought  by  J.  Lee  Hartwell.  This  copy  was  seen 
in  Hartwell's  Library  in  1847  by  Bardelli,  professor  of  Sanskrit 
and  Coptic,  in  the  University  of  Pisa.  It  was  then  incomplete, 
containing  only  Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus,  the  Psalms,  the 
twelve  Minor  Prophets,  the  four  Gospels,  the  fourteen  Epistles 
of  St.  Paul,  the  Epistle  of  St.  James,  and  the  first  Epistle  of 
St.  Peter ;  in  all,  forty-one  volumes  in  4to.  The  missing 
volumes  perished  in  the  burning  of  Marcel's  house  at  Cairo. 
The  books  bear  an  Arabic  translation  opposite  the  Coptic  text. 
These  books  are  somewhere  in  England,  though,  thus  far,  they 
have  not  all  been  located. 

The  ruin  of  the  Sahidic  literature  is  greater.  Only  frag- 
ments remain  of  the  several  books  which  have  been  dug  out  of 
the  ruins  of  convents,  and  sold  by  the  Arabs  to  explorers  and 
tourists.     These  are  scattered  through  the  libraries  of  Europe. 

Before  speaking  of  the  date  and  nature  of  the  Coptic  Scrip- 
tures, we  shall  first  briefly  notice  some  of  the  principal  publi- 
cations of  this  version  in  Europe. 


610  THE  COPTIC  VERSIONS. 

In  1 73 1  Wilkin  published  at  London  the  Bohairic  Penta- 
teuch, In  1837,  de  Lagarde  published  a  complete  edition  of 
the  Pentateuch,  but  in  neither  of  these  editions  was  use  made 
of  the  Vatican  MS.  i,  the  most  ancient  and  best  of  all  known 
Coptic  MSS. 

Of  the  other  historical  books  we  have  only  fragments 
gathered  from  Coptic  liturgical  books.  De  Lagarde  collected 
these  and  published  them  in  1879.  I"  ^^4^  Tattam  published 
the  Book  of  Job.  The  Bohairic  Psalter  was  published  in  1744, 
by  Tuki  from  MS.  5  of  the  Vatican.  Other  editions  of  the 
Psalter  have  been  given  by  Ideler,  Schwartz,  de  Lagarde,  and 
F.  Rossi. 

The  fragment  of  Proverbs  I.  i — XIV.  26,  were  published  in 
1875,  in  Latin  characters.  The  same  chapters  were  published 
again  by  Bouriant  in  1882.  The  last  named  savant,  has  also 
published  fragments  of  Wisdom  and  Ecclesiasticus. 

In  1836,  Tattam  published  as  Oxford,  the  Bohairic  text  of 
the  Minor  Prophets. 

Baruch  was  published  in  1870  at  Rome  from  a  MS.  of  Cairo 
by  Mgr.  Bsciai. 

In  1849,  Bardelli  published  the  Bohairic  text  of  Daniel, 
which  contains  all  the  deuterocanonical  fragments.  In  1852 
Tattam  published  a  second  edition  of  the  same  text,  with  a 
Latin  translation. 

In  1852,  the  Coptic  text  of  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah,  and 
Ezechiel  was  published  by  Tattam  at  Oxford. 

This  is  the  only  edition  yet  published  of  these  three 
Prophets. 

In  1716,  David  Wilkins  published  the  entire  Bohairic  New 
Testament.  He  made  use  of  excellent  MSS.,  and  his  work  is 
the  editio  princeps  of  the  Bohairic  version  of  Scripture.  In  the 
judgment  of  M.  Hyvernat,  Wilkins  has  made  poor  use  of  his 
excellent  materials.  In  1829,  the  British  and  Foreign  Bible 
Society  published  an  edition  of  the  Bohairic  New  Testament 
with  an  Arab  translation.  The  text  is  that  of  Wilkins,  with 
slight  modifications. 

In  1846,  appeared  the  Gospels  of  Matthew  and  Mark  in 
Coptic,  by  Schwartz ;  and  in  1847,  the  Gospels  of  Luke  and 
John,  by  the  same  editor.  He  had  a  better  knowledge  of 
Coptic  than  Wilkins,  though  his  edition  does  not  show  it. 
Schwartz  was  prevented  by  death  from  finishing  the  edition  of 
the  complete  New  Testament.  P.  Boetticher,  better  known 
as  Paul  de  Lagarde,  completed  it  in  1852,  on  a  more  critical 
plan.       About    the    same    time    a     magnificent    edition    of 


THE  COPTIC  VERSIONS.  511 

the  New  Testament  in  Coptic  was  published  for  the 
Society  for  promoting  Christian  knowledge,  by  Henry 
Tattam. 

M.  Hyvernat  declares  that  all  the  editions  of  Tattam  have 
no  critical  value. 

The  first  specimens  of  the  Sahidic  version  published  in 
Europe,  were  by  R.  Tuki,  in  his  Rudimenta  Linguae  Coptae,  in 
1778.  In  1785,  Mingarelli  published  fragments  from  SS.  Mat- 
thew and  John  from  MSS.  furnished  him  by  Cav.  Nani.  Min- 
garelli, left  the  third  part  of  the  MSS.  unpublished  at  his  death. 
In  1789,  A.  Giorgi  published  a  fragment  of  St.  John  with  a  Greek 
translation.  About  the  same  time,  Miinter,  the  Dane,  pub- 
lished several  fragments  at  Copenhagen.  In  1778,  Woide  was 
commissioned  by  the  University  of  Oxford  to  publish  the 
Sahidic  New  Testament.  Materials  accumulated,  and  he  died 
in  1790,  without  finishing  the  work.  Henry  Ford  brought  it 
to  completion  in  1799.  It  is  enriched  by  excellent  notes.  In 
1801  or  1802,  Zoega  was  emploj'ed  by  Card.  Borgia  to  edit  the 
Coptic  Scripture  from  MSS.  then  in  the  Cardinal's  possession. 
In  1804,  the  Cardinal  died,  and  left  his  library  to  the  Propa- 
ganda. Zoega  continued  his  work  from  the  Propaganda's  de- 
posit. The  work  went  to  press  in  1805.  Litigation  with  Card. 
Borgia's  heirs  delayed  it  so,  that  the  edition  did  not  appear 
till  1 8 10,  nearly  a  year  after  Zoega's  death.  It  is  the  best  col- 
lection of  Coptic  literature  ever  published.  In  the  collection 
there  are  several  Sahidic  fragments. 

Nothing  more  was  done  in  Coptic  publications,  till  in  1875 
Peyron  published  the  Sahidic  Psalter.  Since  that  time,  im- 
portant Coptic  publications  have  been  published  by  de  Lagarde, 
Agapios  Bsciai,  Ciasca,  Hermann,  Bouriant,  Amelineau,  and 
Maspero. 

Passing  over  some  isolated  and  feeble  testimonies  of  certain 
ones  who  would  make  the  Coptic  a  version  derived  directly 
from  the  Hebrew,  we  look  for  the  proofs  of  its  real  date  in  the 
rapid  spread  of  Christianity  in  Egypt.  The  first  Christians  of 
Egypt  were  probably  Hellenist  Jews,  who  made  use  of  Greek 
Scriptures,  but  from  the  advent  of  St.  Mark  the  religion  of 
Christ  spread  rapidly  among  the  native  people,  so  that  at  his 
death  in  62,  or  at  the  latest,  in  68,  Egypt  had  many  bishops. 

During  half  a  century  after  his  death,  peace  reigned,  and 
the  faith  of  Christ  was  allowed  to  fix  its  roots  deeply  in 
Egypt.  At  the  end  of  the  third  century,  Egypt  was  solidly 
and  universally  Christian ;  it  had  bishops  in  every  place,  and 
monasticism,  inaugurated  by  St.  Anthony,  was  a  strong  and 


512  THE   COPTIC  VERSIONS. 

growing  institution.  The  first  evangelists  of  Egypt,  doubtless, 
made  use  of  the  Greek  tongue.  In  fact,  for  centuries,  Greek 
remained  the  official  liturgical  and  Scriptural  tongue.  This 
is  clearly  proven  by  several  Graeco-Coptic  MSS.  which  have 
been  preserved  for  us.  But  it  is  probable  that,  at  the  same 
time,  Coptic  translations  of  Scripture  were  made  in  the  second 
century.  At  that  epoch,  the  native  population  formed  the 
body  of  Christian  laity  and  clergy.  Now  the  common  people 
knew  no  Greek.  What  is  a  probability  in  the  second  century, 
is  a  certainty  in  the  third  century. 

Many  passages  in  the  life  of  St.  Anthony  (251-256)  (Patr, 
Graeca,  Tom.  XXVI.  Col.  841,  944  et  seqq.)  prove  that  the 
saintly  hermit  knew  no  tongue  but  the  native  Egyptian  ;  and 
yet  he  was  moved  to  leave  the  world  by  hearing  the  reading 
of  the  passage  concerning  the  rich  young  man  (Matth.  XIX. 
16).  St.  Athanasius  informs  us  that  Anthony  was  well  versed 
in  Scripture,  and,  therefore,  it  must  have  been  in  the  Coptic 
Scriptures.  In  fact,  in  the  writings  that  have  come  down  to 
us  of  St.  Anthony,  frequent  quotations  of  both  Testaments 
appear. 

History  bears  record  of  a  great  number  of  bishops  and 
monks  of  that  epoch  who  were  well  versed  in  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures, and  yet  they  knew  no  Greek.  The  tongue  of  the  mon- 
asteries was  Coptic.  St.  Pacomius  (292-348)  did  not  learn 
Greek  till  at  an  advanced  age  (Rosweyde) ;  and  in  the  rules  of 
his  monastery  (Patr.  Lat.  Migne,  23,  Col.  70)  it  was  established 
that  the  study  of  the  Scriptures  was  one  of  the  chief  employ- 
ments of  the  monks.  Postulants  were  required  to  memorize 
the  Psalter.  Epiphanius  informs  us  that  Hierax,  the  heretic, 
being  well  versed  in  Greek  and  Coptic  and  in  the  Scriptures, 
seduced  certain  monks  of  Egypt  by  arguments  drawn  from  the 
Scriptures.  Hence  we  place  the  date  of  the  Coptic  Scriptures 
about  the  close  of  the  second  century. 

Wetstein  and  Stern  denied  the  antiquity  of  the  Coptic 
version,  but  the  former  was  ably  refuted  by  Woide,  and  the 
latter  by  Headlam. 

It  is  evident  from  these  data  that  the  Coptic  version  was 
made  from  the  Septuagint,  except  in  the  Book  of  Daniel, 
where  the  text  of  Theodotion  is  taken  for  the  basic  text.  The 
Bohairic  and  Sahidic  versions  are  independent  from  each  other, 
and  seem  to  have  been  made  from  different  recensions  of  the 
Greek  text.  As  the  Coptic  language  is  devoid  of  particles, 
the  Greek  particles  aWd,  Be,  yap,  ovv,  fiev,  ovSe,  etc.,  are  trans- 
lated into  Coptic. 


THE   ETHIOPIC   VERSION.  513 

The  Coptic  has  no  passive  voice,  nor  no  verb  corresponding 
to  the  e%<»  of  the  Greek,  but  yet,  being  furnished  with  definite 
and  indefinite  articles,  it  is  judged  to  be  superior  to  the  Latin 
or  Syriac,  in  rendering  the  Greek. 

The  Coptic  versions  are  of  great  worth  in  textual  criticism. 
They  exhibit  a  reproduction  of  the  Greek  text  before  it  had 
suffered  the  numerous  modifications  that  came  into  it,  after 
the  issue  of  the  Hexapla  of  Origen.  The  learned  Catholic, 
A.  Schulte,  has  given  us  a  critical  edition  of  the  Prophets. 
The  celebrated  reference  of  Matthew  XXVII.  9-10,  is  found 
in  both  the  Bohairic  and  Sahidic  texts  of  Jeremiah.* 

The  Bohairic  New  Testament  is  purer  than  the  Sahidic, 
which  gives  indication  of  its  remoter  date. 

Mgr.  Ciasca  has  made  a  critical  study  of  the  Sahidic  version. 
He  finds  that  it  has  felt  the  influence  of  the  hexaplar  text,  and 
it  is  probable  that  the  version  as  we  have  it,  is  a  later  recen- 
sion, made  to  accord  with  some  recension  of  the  Greek  text. 

The  Sahidic  New  Testament,  has  been  studied  by  Muenter. 
It  is  inferior  to  the  Bohairic  version. 

The  fragments  of  the  Akmimian  version,  commonly  called 
the  Bashmuric  fragments,  were  published  by  Bouriant.  Krall 
has  also  given  us  a  specimen  of  a  fragment  of  the  Minor 
Prophets.  But  it  has  not  been  studied  sufficiently  to  judge  of 
its  critical  value.  The  Fayoumian  version  and  the  version  of 
Middle  Egypt,  which  once  were  identified  with  the  Sahidic 
version,  must  be  considered  as  separate  groups,  but  our 
knowledge  of  them  is  very  imperfect. 

Chapter  XXV. 

The  Ethiopic  Version  of  Scripture. 

Concerning  the  evangelization  of  Ethiopia,  Rufinus  gives 
us  the  following  data.  Meropius,  a  philosopher  of  Tyre,  set 
out  on  a  voyage,  having  in  mind  to  visit  that  region  which  in 
those  days  was  called  India.  He  brought  with  him  two  youths, 
Edesius  and  Frumentius,  for  whose  education  he  was  provid- 
ing. Having  concluded  their  observations,  they  set  sail  for 
their  own  country,  and  while  passing  the  coast  of  Abyssinia, 

*Iterum  dixit  Jeremias  Pashori:  Eritis  aliquando  cum  patribus  vestris 
repugnantes  veritati,  et  filii  vestri  venturi  post  vos,  isti  facient  iniquitatem 
magis  abominandam  quam  vos.  Nam  ipsi  dabunt  pretium  pro  eo,  cui  nullum 
est  pretium.  Et  nocebunt  ei  qui  sanatmorbos,  et  in  remissionem  peccatorum. 
Et  accipient  triginta  argenteos  in  pretium  ejus  quem  tradent  filii  Israelis. 
Et  ad  dandum  id,  pro  agro  figuli,  sicut  mandavit  Dominus.  Et  ita  dicent : 
Veniet  super  eos  judicium  perditionis  in  seternum  et  super  Alios  eorum  quia 
condemnaverunt  sanguinem  innocentem. 

GG 


514  THE    ETHIOPIC   VERSION. 

they  touched  at  a  certain  port  for  water  and  other  necessary 
articles.  The  natives  were  at  that  time  incensed  against 
Rome,  and  they  set  upon  Meropius  and  his  crew  and  slew 
them.  They  spared  the  two  youths,  Edesius  and  Frumentius, 
whom  they  brought  to  the  King.  Edesius  was  appointed  his 
cup-bearer;  and  Frumentius,  his  secretary.  Forthwith  the 
King  held  them  in  high  honor,  and  love.  At  his  death,  he  left 
the  kingdom  to  his  Queen  and  infant  son.  He  gave  Edesius 
and  Frumentius  their  liberty.  The  Queen  besought  them, 
that  they  would  remain  and  administer  the  kingdom  till  her 
son  should  come  to  that  estate,  in  which  he  could  sustain  the 
burden  of  the  office.  She  especially  required  the  help  of  Fru- 
mentius, whose  prudence  all  recognized.  They  remained,  and 
Frumentius  became  regent  of  the  realm.  As  they  were  both 
Christians,  Frumentius  began  to  make  use  of  his  great  power 
by  favoring  the  Christian  merchants,  who  came  to  the  kingdom 
to  trade ;  and  by  his  exhortation  and  active  help,  many  churches 
were  constructed,  and  many  natives  converted  to  Christianity. 
When  the  Prince  came  to  his  majority,  Edesius  and  Frumen- 
tius set  out  for  their  own  country.  Edesius  came  to  Tyre,  and 
was  made  Bishop  of  that  See.  Frumentius  went  to  Alexan- 
dria and  laid  before  St.  Athanasius,  the  Patriarch,  the  condition 
of  the  land,  which  he  had  left,  and  its  need  of  a  bishop  and 
priests. 

Athanasius,  in  a  council  of  priests,  elected  Frumentius  him- 
self to  be  bishop  of  the  strange  country.  He  soon  after  re- 
ceived ordination  and  consecration  from  St.  Athanasius,  and 
returned  to  the  scene  of  his  first  labors.  The  richest  fruits 
rewarded  his  apostolic  labors,  and  an  immense  number  of  the 
natives  received  the  faith  of  Christ.  Rufinus  declares  that  he 
received  these  data  from  Edesius  himself.  (P.  L.  Migne,  21, 
478.)    ^ 

This  would  bring  the  evangelization  of  Abyssinia  in  the  be- 
ginning of  the  fourth  century.  In  that  time  Abyssinia  formed 
the  old  kingdom  of  Auxuma. 

When  Constantius  succeeded  Constantine,  he  endeavored 
to  move  the  King  of  Auxuma  to  expel  Frumentius,  and  re- 
ceive Arianism.  This  attempt  failed,  but  in  the  sixth 
centur}'-,  through  the  influence  of  the  Monophysite  Patri- 
archs of  Alexandria,  they  fell  into  the  Monophysite  heresy, 
and  there  is  little  of  orthodox  Catholicity  left  in  the 
country  now. 

The  Ethiopians  call  Frumentius,  Abba  Salama.  It  is  evi- 
dent that  he  could  make  little  progress  in  evangelizing  the 


THE   ETHIOPIC   VERSION.  616 

country  by  means  of  Greek  Scriptures,  of  which  the  people 
knew  nothing.  The  data  seem  to  warrant  that  Frumentius 
chose  the  Ghez  dialect,  which  was  spoken  at  the  court  and 
among  the  upper  classes,  and  translated  into  this  the  Holy 
Scriptures.  We  believe,  therefore,  that  the  Ethiopic  liturgy 
and  version  of  Scripture  go  back  to  the  fourth  century.  The 
Ghez  dialect  no  longer  prevails  in  Abyssinia.  In  1300  the 
Amharic  dialect  began  to  supplant  the  old  Ghez,  and  now  the 
Amharic  is  spoken  throughout  the  country.  In  the  years 
between  18 10  and  1820,  Asselin  de  Cherville,  the  French 
consul  at  Cairo,  translated,  by  the  aid  of  Abou-Roumi,  the 
Scriptures  into  Amharic.  His  version  was  purchased  by  the 
British  Bible  Society.  J.  P.  Piatt  revised  it,  and  published  the 
Gospels  in  1824.  He  published  the  whole  New  Testament  in 
1829,  and  the  whole  Bible  in  1842.  In  1875  the  society  pub- 
lished a  new  edition,  under  the  supervision  of  Krapf  and 
several  Abyssinians. 

An  inspection  of  the  Ethiopic  text,  clearly  reveals  that  it 
was  made  from  the  Greek.  Many  difficult  Greek  words  are 
left  untranslated.  Certain  errors  also  are  explained  from  a 
misapprehension  of  the  Greek  text.  Evidences  are  found  that 
more  than  one  interpreter  labored  in  the  translation.  The 
original  interpreters  followed  the  Greek  text  closely,  and  the 
edition  would  be  of  much  critical  worth  in  restoring  the  Greek 
text  of  that  age,  if  it  had  come  down  to  us  incorrupt ;  but 
great  freedom  was  used  by  later  hands  in  interpolating  many 
passages,  so  that  a  critical  edition  is  necessary  before  the  book 
shall  be  of  any  critical  worth.  Many  believe  that  there  were 
two  editions  of  the  New  Testament.  In  the  Old  Testament, 
they  recognize,  i. — The  original  version  ;  2. — A  recension  made 
from  later  Greek  codices,  which  became  the  Ethiopic  Vulgate  ; 
and  3. — A  still  later  recension,  made  from  the  Hebrew  text. 
Some,  however,  deny  these  later  recensions,  and  believe  that 
there  existed  only  one  version  which  has  suffered  interpolations 
and  glosses. 

No  complete  edition  of  the  ancient  text  has  ever  been 
published.  In  15 13  John  Potken  published  the  Psalter  and 
some  canticles  from  the  New  Testament.  In  15 18  he 
published  the  Canticle  of  Canticles.  In  1548  the 
New  Testament  was  published  at  Rome.  Some  other 
unimportant  and  modern  editions  have  been  wrought, 
but  the  codices  anterior  to  the  fifteenth  century  have 
not  been  examined,  and  the  outlook  for  the  old  text 
seems  dark. 


616  THE   GOTHIC   VERSION. 

Chapter  XXVI. 
The  Gothic  Version. 

The  Goths  were  a  Germanic  gens  who,  in  the  second  cen- 
tury, spread  from  the  Vistula  to  the  Danube.  Some  of  them 
were  converted  in  the  third  century  to  Christianity.  Theo- 
philus,  the  Gothic  bishop,  sat  in  the  Council  of  Nice,  and 
signed  the  decree  of  the  Consubstantiality  of  the  Son  of  God. 
In  the  fourth  century,  they  were  expelled  from  their  lands  by 
the  Huns.  They  receded  eastward,  and  took  up  their  abode 
within  the  realm  of  the  Byzantine  Empire.  As  Arianism  was 
in  the  ascendancy  at  the  court  of  the  Emperor,  Valens,  and  in 
the  realm,  they  soon  lapsed  into  that  heresy.  Their  bishop  at 
that  time  was  Ulphilas,  of  whose  life  we  have  only  very  uncer- 
tain details.  Some  believe  that  he  first  professed  the  orthodox 
Catholic  faith  and  afterwards  lapsed  into  Arianism  to  gain  the 
favor  of  Valens.  It  is  certain  that  he  was  a  zealous  promoter 
of  Arianism  among  the  Goths,  and  that  it  was  he  who  gave 
them  their  version  of  Scriptures.  This  places  the  date  of 
the  Gothic  version  about  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century.  It 
is  asserted  by  Comely  that  this  version  was  employed  also  by 
some  of  the  Catholic  Goths,     (op.  cit.) 

The  Goths  in  that  age  had  no  alphabet.  Ulphilas  adopted 
the  old  Runic  characters  with  some  additions  from  the 
Greek. 

Philostorgius  testifies :  **  that  Ulphilas  translated  into  his 
mother  tongue,  all  the  books  of  Holy  Scripture  except  the 
books  of  Kings,  for  the  reason  that  these  contain  the  account 
of  wars,  and  the  Goths  naturally  delight  in  warfare,  and  have 
more  need  to  be  held  back  from  battles  than  to  be  spurred  on 
to  warlike  deeds."  (Hist.  Eccles.  XI.  5.)  This  seems  improbable, 
and  is  disproven  by  the  discovery  by  Mai,  in  1817,  in  the  Am- 
brosian  Library,  of  a  Palimpsest  fragment  of  the  Gothic  text  of 
Kings. 

The  version  of  Ulphilas  was  in  universal  use  among  the 
Goths,  while  they  retained  their  individuality  as  a  race,  but 
later  their  language,  and  their  version  passed  into  oblivion. 

In  1669,  the  Chancellor  of  Queen  Christina  of  Sweden, 
Gabriel  de  la  Gardie,  presented  to  the  University  of  Upsal 
several  MSS.,  among  which  was  one  which  is  since  known  as 
the  Codex  Argenteus.  Investigation  proved  it  to  be  a  Codex 
of  the  Gothic  Gospels.  It  is  called  Argenteus,  either  because 
its  binding  is  of  massive  silver,  or  because  its  letters  are  of 
silver. 


'the   GOTHIC  VERSION.  617 

Some  have  maintained  that  the  victorious  Gustave  Adolph 
sent  the  Codex  to  Sweden  with  other  booty,  that  he  took  from 
the  libraries  of  the  Jesuites  at  Riga,  Brunsberg  and  Oppen- 
heim. 

Battifol  denies  this.  Junius,  who  first  published  the  MS.  in 
1665,  testifies,  that  it  was  in  the  possession  of  Isaac  Vossius, 
the  celebrated  librarian  of  Queen  Christina.  Toward  the  close 
of  the  fifteenth  century,  the  Codex  was  in  the  library  of  the 
monastery  of  Werden,  near  Diisseldorf,  where  Morilloni  saw 
it,  and  copied  from  it  the  Gothic  text  of  the  Lord's  Prayer, 
which  Becanus  published  in  1569.  We  next  find  it  at  Prague 
in  1601,  whence  it  was  taken  by  the  Swedes  in  the  war  of 
1648.  Marshal  Konigsmark  gave  it  to  Queen  Christina.  It 
originally  contained  the  four  Gospels  in  the  order  of  Matthew, 
John,  Luke,  Mark,  but  it  has  suffered  serious  mutilations.  It 
is  written  in  uncial  characters. 

The  Codex  Argenteus,  is  the  most  important  portion  of 
Gothic  Scripture  preserved  to  us. 

Some  fragments  of  the  Gothic  version  of  St.  Paul's  Epistle 
to  the  Romans  were  discovered  by  M.  Knittel,  in  the  year 
1756,  in  a  Codex  Rescriptus  belonging  to  the  library  of  the  duke 
of  Brunswick  at  Wolfenbiittel :  they  were  published  by  him  in 
1762,  and  reprinted  in  1763,  in  4to.,  at  Upsal,  with  notes  by 
Ihre.  The  Brunswick  manuscript,  which  is  on  vellum,  and  is 
supposed  to  be  of  the  sixth  century,  contains  only  the  follow- 
ing passages,  viz.  Rom.  XL  33-36;  XII.  1-5,  17-21;  XIV.  9- 
20;  XV.  3-13.  The  version  of  Ulphilas  is  in  one  column,  and 
a  Latin  translation  in  the  other.  It  is  on  Vellum,  and  is  supposed 
to  be  of  the  sixth  century.  In  the  eighth  or  ninth  century,  the 
Origines  hidori  Hispalensis  were  written  over  the  translation 
of  Ulphilas  ;  and  the  ink  had  became  so  exceedingly  pale,  as 
not  to  admit  of  deciphering  the  original  manuscript  without 
great  difficulty. 

In  the  year  18 17,  a  most  important  discovery  was  made 
among  the  Codices  Rescripti,  in  the  Ambrosian  library  at  Milan, 
by  signor  Angelo  Mai.  While  this  indefatigable  explorer  of 
ancient  literature  was  examining  two  Codices  Rescripti  in  the 
Ambrosian  library,  he  was  surprised  with  the  discovery  of  some 
Gothic  writing  in  one  of  them  ;  which  on  further  investigation 
proved  to  be  fragments  of  the  books  of  Kings,  Ezra,  and 
Nehemiah.  The  discovery  thus  auspiciously  made  stimulated 
him  to  further  inquiries,  which  were  rewarded  with  the  dis- 
covery of  four  other  Codices  Rescripti  containing  portions 
of  the  Gothic  version.     He  now  associated  in  his  researches 


618  THE   GOTHIC  VERSION. 

signer  Carolo  Ottavio  Castillionei ;  and  to  their  joint  labors  we 
are  indebted  for  a  specimen  and  account  of  these  manuscripts, 
from  which  the  following  particulars  are  abridged. 

The  first  of  these  five  Gothic  MSS.  (which  is  noted  S.  36.) 
consists  of  204  quarto  pages  on  vellum  ;  the  later  writing  con- 
tains the  homilies  of  Gregory  the  Great  on  the  Prophecies  of 
Ezekiel,  which  from  their  characters  must  have  been  executed 
before  the  eighth  century.  Beneath  this,  in  a  more  ancient  Gothic 
hand,  are  contained  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Romans, 
I.  and  II.  Corinthians,  Ephesians,  Philippians,  Colossians,  I. 
and  II.  of  Timothy,  Titus,  Philemon,  together  with  a  fragment 
of  the  Gothic  Calendar.  The  Epistles  to  the  Romans,  Cor- 
inthians, Ephesians,  and  to  Timothy,  are  very  nearly  entire, 
and  form  the  chief  part  of  this  manuscript :  of  the  other 
Epistles  considerable  fragments  only  remain.  The  titles  of  the 
Epistles  may  be  traced  at  the  heads  of  the  pages  where  they 
commence. 

The  second  MS.  also  in  quarto,  and  noted  S.  45.,  contains 
156  pages  of  thinner  vellum,  the  Latin  writing  on  which  is  of 
the  eighth  or  ninth  century,  and  comprises  Jerome's  expos- 
ition of  Isaiah.  Under  this  has  been  discovered  (though  with 
some  difficulty,  on  account  of  the  thickness  of  the  Latin 
characters  and  the  blackness  of  the  ink,)  the  Gothic  version  of 
Saint  Paul's  two  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians,  the  Galatians, 
Ephesians,  Philippians,  Colossians,  the  two  Epistles  to  the 
Thessalonians,  and  to  Titus.  What  is  deficient  in  the  preced- 
ing manuscript  is  found  in  this,  which  has  some  various  read- 
ings peculiar  to  itself,  and  therefore  is  an  independent  codex. 

In  the  third  manuscript,  noted  G.  82.,  a  quarto  Latin 
volume,  containing  the  plays  of  Plautus,  and  part  of  Seneca's 
Tragedies  of  Medea  and  QEdipus,  signor  Mai  discovered  frag- 
ments of  the  Books  of  Kings,  Ezra,  and  Nehemiah.  This  dis- 
covery is  peculiarly  valuable,  as  not  the  smallest  portion  of 
the  Gothic  version  of  the  Old  Testament  was  known  to  be  in 
existence. 

The  fourth  specimen  (noted  I.  61.)  consists  of  a  single 
sheet  in  small  quarto,  containing  four  pages  of  part  of  Saint 
John's  Gospel  in  Latin,  under  which  are  found  the  very  frag- 
ments of  the  twenty-fifth,  twenty-sixth,  and  twenty-seventh 
chapters  of  Matthew's  Gospel,  which  are  wanting  in  the  cele- 
brated manuscript  of  the  Gothic  Gospels  preserved  at  Upsal, 
and  usually  known  by  the  appellation  of  the  Codex  Argenteus. 

The  yf/if/i  and  last  manuscript,  (noted  G.  147.)  which  has 
preserved  some  remains  of  Gothic  literature,  is  a  volume  of  the 


THE  ARMENIAN  VERSION.  519 

proceedings  of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  ;  under  the  later  writ- 
ing have  been  discovered  some  fragments  of  ancient  authors, 
whose  names  signor  Mai  has  not  specified  ;  and  also  a  frag- 
ment of  a  Gothic  Homily,  rich  in  biblical  quotations,  and  the 
style  of  which  he  thinks  shows  that  it  was  translated  from  some 
one  of  the  fathers  of  the  Greek  Church.  The  characters  of  this 
manuscript  bear  a  close  resemblance  to  those  of  the  Codex 
Argenteus,  at  Upsal,  which  was  executed  in  the  sixth  century. 

The  manuscripts  above  described  are  written  in  broad  and 
thick  characters,  without  any  division  of  words  or  of  chapters, 
but  with  contractions  of  proper  names,  similar  to  those  found 
in  ancient  Greek  MSS.  Some  sections,  however,  have  been 
discovered,  which  are  indicated  by  numeral  marks  or  larger 
spaces,  and  sometimes  by  large  letters.  The  Gothic  writing  is 
referred  to  the  sixth  century. 

The  portions  of  the  Gothic  version  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testament,  printed  by  signors  Mai  and  Castillionei,  are  I. 
Nehemiah,  Chap.  V.  verses  13 — 18;  Chap.  VI.  14 — 19,  and  VIII. 
I — 3.  II.  A  Fragment  of  Saint  Matthew's  Gospel,  containing 
Chap.  XXV.  38—46;  XXVI.  1—3;  65— 75,  and  XXVII.  i. 
III.  Part  of  St.  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Philippians,  Chap.  II. 
22 — 30,  and  III.  I — 16.  IV.  Saint  Paul's  Epistle  to  Titus, 
Chap.  I.  I — 16  ;  II.  I.;  and  V.  verses  11 — 23  of  his  Epistle  to 
Philemon.  The  Gothic  text  is  exhibited  on  the  left-hand 
page,  and  on  the  right-hand  page  the  editors  have  given  a  lit- 
eral Latin  translation  of  it,  together  with  the  Greek  original. 
These  are  succeeded  by  fragments  of  a  Gothic  Homily  and 
Calendar,  with  Latin  translations,  Gothic  alphabet,  and  a 
glossary  of  new  Gothic  words,  which  they  have  discovered  in 
the  passages  which  they  have  printed.  In  1829  signor  Castil- 
lionei published  the  fragments  of  Ulphilas's  version  of  the 
second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians. 

The  Gothic  version  was  made  from  the  Greek,  which  it 
faithfully  follows.  One  evidence  of  the  translator's  Arianism 
appears  in  Paul's  Epistle  to  Philippians  II.  6,  where  Ulphilas 
translates  the  la-o<;  not  by  idna  or  samaleiks,  but  by  galeiks, 
which  signifies  o\xoio<i. 

It  is  to  be  regretted  that  we  have  no  critical  edition  of  the 
Gothic  Scriptures. 

Chapter  XXVII. 

The  Armenian  Version  of  Scripture. 

The  evangelization  of  Armenia  was  wrought  by  Gregory 
the    Illuminator,   in   the    first   years   of    the    fourth   century. 


620  THE   ARMENIAN   VERSION. 

Sozomen  informs  us  that  Tiridates  was  first  converted,  and 
then  by  public  edict  bade  Armenia  receive  the  faith  of  Christ. 
(Hist.  Eccles.  II.  8.) 

For  more  than  a  century  the  Armenians  had  no  proper 
version  of  Scripture  nor  liturgy.  They  made  use  of  the  Syriac 
text.     At  that  time  they  had  no  alphabet. 

When  Isaac  became  patriarch  (390-440),  St.  Mesrob,  his 
colaborer,  gave  himself  to  invent  an  alphabet.  He  traveled 
much  and  consulted  many  learned  men,  and  finally,  in  406,  he 
perfected  an  alphabet  of  thirty-six  letters,  by  which  all  the 
sounds  of  the  Armenian  language  are  expressed. 

When  Mesrob  had  arranged  the  Armenian  Alphabet 
(406  A.  D.)  he  undertook,  under  the  direction  of  the  Patri- 
arch Isaac,  and  with  the  aid  of  his  principal  disciples, 
John  Egueghiatz  and  Joseph  Baghin,  a  translation  of  "the 
twenty-two  canonical  books  of  the  Old  Testament  and  a  trans- 
lation of  the  New  Testament."  This  work  was  finished  in 
411.  Cf.  Gorioun  Biography  of  Mesrob,  in  Langlois'  Collection 
of  Ancient  and  Modern  Histories  of  Armenia,  2  vols,  in  4  mo., 
Paris,  1839,  t.  II.  p.  10;  T.  N6ve,  Christian  Armenia  and  its 
Literature,  in  8mo.,  Paris,  1886,  p.  13,  22.  Cf.  Moses  of 
Khorene,  III.  53.  This  first  version  was  made  by  Saint  Isaac 
from  the  Syriac,  says  Moses,  the  historian.  III.  54,  because  no 
one  possessed  the  Greek  text,  and  the  more,  because  the 
Syriac  tongue  had  been,  for  different  reasons,  the  liturgical 
language  in  certain  countries  of  Armenia,  up  to  the  time  of 
the  invention  of  the  Armenian  alphabet  by  Mesrob.  Gorioun, 
Biography  of  Mesrob,  p.  11  ;  Lazare  de  Pharbe,  Histoire  X.  in 
Langlois'  Collection,  t.  II.  p.  226.  Cf.  Saint  Martin,  Historical 
and  Geographical  Memoirs  of  Armenia,  2  in  8mo.,  Paris,  1819, 
t.  I.  p.  II  ;  Tchamitchian,  History  of  Armenia  Translated  by 
Avdall,  2  in  8mo.,  Calcutta,  1827,  t.  I.  p.  239;  R.  Simon, 
Critical  History  of  the  Versions  of  the  New  Testament,  in  4mo., 
Rotterdam,  1690,  p.  196.  This  first  work,  made  in  haste,  from 
indifferent  exemplars  doubtless  was  defective  in  many  things. 
Some  years  later,  Isaac  and  Mesrob  sent  John  Baghin  with 
Eznik,  another  of  their  disciples,  to  Edessa,  that  they  might 
translate  the  Holy  Scriptures  from  the  Syriac  into  the  Ar- 
menian. Gorioun,  Biography  of  Mesrob,  p.  11-12.  These  two 
young  men  repaired  from  Edessa  to  Byzantium,  where  they  were 
rejoined  by  other  disciples  of  Mesrob,  among  whom  was 
Gorioun,  the  author  of  the  Biography  of  Mesrob.  They  passed 
several  years  at  Byzantium,  and  were  still  there  at  the  time  of 
the  Council  of  Ephesus  (431).     Their  labors  ended,  they  re- 


THE    ARMENIAN  VERSION.  521 

turned  to  Armenia,  carrying  among  their  literary  effects  the 
Acts  of  the  Council,  and  authentic  copies  of  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures in  Greek.  Gorioun,  ibid.  Isaac  and  Mesrob  immediately 
sought  to  turn  these  latter  to  good  account,  and  retouch  the 
old  version  made  from  the  Syriac,  by  exactly  comparing  it  with 
the  authentic  copies  which  had  been  brought  to  them.  But 
the  translators  who  worked  under  their  orders  did  not  have  a 
sufificient  knowledge  of  the  Greek  language,  and  their  labor 
was  judged  very  imperfect.  They,  therefore,  sent  other  young 
men  to  study  Greek  at  Alexandria.  Moses  of  Khorene  was 
among  this  number.  (Moses  of  Khorene,  III.  6i).  They 
doubtless  brought  back  from  Egypt,  other  Greek  exemplars 
of  the  Bible,  which  they  used  to  perfect  the  work  of  their 
predecessors  in  faithfully  translating  the  text  of  the  Septua- 
gint,  from  the  Hexapla  of  Origen  ;  because  the  same  signs  and 
asterisks  are  found  in  the  old  Armenian  manuscripts  of  the 
Bible.  Cf.  P.  Zohrab,  Armenian  Bible,  4  in  8mo.,  Venice, 
1805,  Introd.  p.  6,  7.  See  Gorioun,  Biography  of  Mesrob,  p. 
Ti,  12.  Moses  of  Khorene,  III.  61  ;  Tchmitichian,  History  of 
Armenia,  I.  i,  p.  239.  Langlois,  {Collection,  t.  II.  p.  168,  note), 
says  that  this  version  was  officially  adopted  by  the  Fathers  of 
the  Council  of  Aschdischad,  in  434.  If  the  fact  and  the  date 
are  correct,  the  approbation  of  the  Fathers  can  refer  only  to 
the  first  version  made  from  the  Greek.  Vide  P.  Donat  Vernier, 
Histoire  du  Patriarcat  ArmMian  Catholique,  in  8mo.,  Paris, 
1891,  p.  128-129. 

Some  authors,  relying  on  a  passage  of  Bar-Hebraeus,  have 
advanced  the  opinion  that  the  Armenian  version  had  been  re- 
touched from  the  Peschito.  But  the  opinion  of  Bar-Hebraeus 
is  a  pure  conjecture,  confirmed  by  no  Armenian  or  Syriac 
document.  For  the  words  of  Bar-Hebraeus  see  Walton,  Pro- 
logomena,  XIII.  16;  Wiseman,  Horce  Syriacce,  p.  142;  Cf. 
Rhode,  Gregorii  Bar-Hebrcsi  scholia  in  Ps.  V.  et  XVIII.,  p. 
74;  Bredenkamp,  Ueber  die  Armenische  Uebersetzung  des 
Alien  Testaments,  in  Eichorn's  Allgemeine  Bibliothek,  Tom.  IV., 
p.  634,  etc.  Some  have  also  maintained,  that  the  Armenian  ver- 
sion was  corrected  from  the  Vulgate  by  King  Haito  II.  at  the 
end  of  the  thirteenth  century.  La  Croze,  Thesaurus  Epistolicus 
III.  3 ;  Michaelis'  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  edit. 
Marsh;  The  Political  History  (Tchamitchian)  of  Armenia,  t. 
II.  p.  263,  and  the  History  of  its  literature  (Somal,  Quadro 
delta  Storia  Litteraria  di  Armenia,  in  8mo.,  Venice,  1829,  p. 
126),  make  no  mention  of  this  retouching  of  the  Armenian 
version.     Both  are  content  with  saying  that  Haito  made  the 


622  THE  ARMENIAN   VERSION. 

Bible  his  favorite  companion ;  that  he  labored  to  make  a  very- 
good  copy  for  himself,  and  that,  having  abdicated  the  royalty, 
he  retired  to  a  convent,  where,  in  a  spirit  of  humility,  he  took 
the  Franciscan  habit.  This  has  been  a  sufficient  basis  for 
certain  minds  to  accuse  him  of  having  corrupted  the  Armenian 
version.  Among  the  numerous  manuscripts  known  to  us, 
none  justify  that  accusation. 

The  Armenian  version  follows  very  closely  the  received 
Greek  text  for  the  Old  Testament  as  well  as  for  the  New. 
The  Greek  text  which  it  follows  can  not  be  reduced  to  any 
known  recension,  which  is  explained,  perhaps,  by  the  fact 
mentioned  above,  that  some  of  the  Greek  manuscripts  which 
the  translators  used,  came  from  Constantinople,  or  Ephesus, 
while  others  came  from  Alexandria.  Bertholdt,  Einleitung, 
t.  II.  p.  560,  believes  that  the  former  belong  to  the  recension 
of  Lucian,  and  the  latter  to  that  of  Hesychius. 

The  Armenian  version  is  very  little  known.  The  majority 
of  scholars  who  have  occupied  themselves  with  the  criticism 
of  the  Greek  text  of  the  Bible,  did  not  know  the  Armenian 
language. 

In  collating  the  Armenian  text,  they  worked  upon  an  in- 
sufficient number  of  variants  that  they  received  from  those 
who  had  a  smattering  of  Armenian.  To  make  matters  worse, 
these  different  readings  were,  for  the  most  part,  taken  from  the 
very  uncritical  edition  of  Uscan.    Tregelles  was  more  fortunate. 

Mr.  Charles  Rieu,  chief  of  the  department  of  oriental  manu- 
scripts in  the  British  museum,  collated  for  him  the  text  of  the 
New  Testament  of  Uscan's  and  Zohrab's  editions,  and  trans- 
lated also  all  the  different  readings  which  the  learned  Mekhi- 
tarist  had  collected.  The  work  of  Mr.  Rieu  has  been  published 
i  n  the  Greek  New  Testament  of  Tregelles.  See  Scrivener,  A 
Plain  Introduction  to  the  Criticism  of  the  New  Testament,  3d 
edit.,  Cambridge,  1883,  p.  408.  Kaulen  has  given  in  his  Ein- 
leitung  in  die  Heilige  Schrift,  a  certain  number  of  passages  of 
the  Armenian  version  (Old  and  New  Testaments),  which  show, 
I. — That  the  Armenian  version  follows  the  Greek  faithfully, 
although  not  servilely,  ibid  §  176,  p.  144;  2. — That  the  version 
agrees  with  the  received  texts,  not  only  as  regards  dogma,  but 
also,  substantially  at  least,  as  regards  criticism. 

In  1563,  Sepher  Abgar  was  sent  to  Rome  by  the  Patriarch 
Michel,  as  ambassador  to  Paul  IV.  While  at  Rome  he  caused 
Armenian  type  to  be  cast,  and  with  these  he  printed  the  Psalter 
at  Venice  in  1565.  This  is  the  Editio  Princeps  of  the  Arme- 
nian Literature. 


THE  ARMENIAN  VERSION.  523 

In  1662,  the  Armenian  Patriarch  James  IV.  sent  Bishop 
Uscan  to  Europe  to  manage  the  publication  of  an  Armenian 
Bible.     He  came  to  Rome,  and  sojourned  five  months. 

As  the  Propaganda  was  not  certain  of  his  orthodoxy,  he 
was  unable  to  realize  his  project  at  Rome;  whereupon,  he 
withdrew  to  Amsterdam,  where  he  published  a  complete  Old 
Testament  in  1666,  and  the  New  Testament  complete  in  1668. 
The  edition  of  Uscan  was  not  approved  by  Rome.  It  is  very 
imperfect.  In  many  things  he  brought  it  in  accord  with  the 
Vulgate.  M.  Hyvernat,  from  whom  we  have  taken  most  of 
these  data,  believes  that  the  passage  relating  to  the  three 
heavenly  witnesses,  I.  John  V.  7,  was  inserted  from  the  Vul- 
gate, and  that  the  Fourth  book  of  Ezra,  Ecclesiasticus,  and  the 
Apocalypse  were  translated  from  the  Vulgate.  The  edition  has 
been  much  praised  by  Richard  Simon.  Certainly  the  man  was 
to  be  commended  for  having  come  to  the  authentic  Latin  text 
for  the  books  that  were  lost  in  Armenian,  and  although  such 
fact  diminishes  the  texts'  critical  value,  it  is  not  an  evidence  of 
ignorance  in  Uscan. 

The  work  of  Uscan  was  perfected  by  the  Armenian  re- 
ligious, called  the  Mekhitarists  at  Venice. 

In  1805  appeared  the  complete  edition  of  the  Scriptures  by 
Zohrab,  one  of  the  Mekhitarists.  At  first,  the  book  of  Eccle- 
siasticus was  placed  in  the  appendix  with  certain  apocryphal 
books.  They  discovered  later  a  Codex  of  Ecclesiasticus  of  the 
V.  century,  and  in  a  later  edition  in  1859,  restored  Ecclesiasti- 
cus to  its  proper  place.  The  verse  of  I.  John  V.  7,  is  omitted 
in  this  edition. 

Many  editions  have  been  published  since  that  time  of 
which  there  is  no  need  to  speak. 

The  people  living  about  Iberia  and  the  region  about  Mt. 
Caucasus,  who  are  termed  Georgians,  or  Grusians,  are  said  to 
have  been  converted  in  the  IV.  century  by  Armenians. 
In  the  life  of  St.  Mesrob,  it  is  stated  that  he  also  gave  an 
alphabet  to  this  people.  They  received  their  Scriptures  from 
the  Armenians,  and  it  is  uncertain  whether  the  translation 
into  their  proper  tongue  was  made  in  the  sixth  or  eighth 
century.  It  is  also  uncertain  whether  it  was  made  from  the 
Greek  or  Armenian  text.  The  Georgian  tongue  is  but  little 
known,  and  no  scholar  has  given  us  the  resources  of  the  afore- 
said version  of  Scripture. 

There  was  printed  at  Moscow,  in  1743,  an  edition  of 
Georgian  Scripture,  based  upon  the  Russian  text,  whence  it  is 
evident  that  it  is  of  no  critical  worth. 


624  THE    ARMENIAN   VERSION. 

The  other  Eastern  versions  are  late  and  unimportant.  In 
the  ninth  century,  SS.  Methodius  and  Cyrill  gave  to  the  Slavs 
a  Slavonic  translation  of  Scripture,  most  probably  made  from 
the  Greek  text. 

The  Arabic  translations,  some  of  which  appear  in  Walton's 
Polyglott,  were  made  in  the  tenth  and  twelfth  centuries,  and 
are  of  no  critical  worth. 

The  Persian  text  of  the  Gospels  which  appears  in  Walton's 
Polyglott,  was  made  from  the  Syriac  Peschito.  Its  date  is  un- 
certain, but  it  is  later  than  the  eighth  century. 

Saadias  Haggaon,  a  Jew  living  in  Egypt  in  the  X.  century, 
translated  the  Pentateuch  from  the  Massoretic  text  into  Arabic. 
In  many  places  the  work  assumes  the  nature  of  a  paraphrase. 
Translations  by  Saadias  also  exist  of  Isaiah,  the  Minor 
Prophets,  the  Psalter  and  Job. 

The  Arabic  text  of  the  Pentateuch  by  Saadias  is  published 
in  Walton's  Polyglott. 

In  1662,  Erpenius  published  an  Arabic  translation  of  the 
Pentateuch  from  a  MS.  belonging  to  Joseph  Scaliger.  This  is 
called  the  Arabs  Erpenii.  It  was  made  from  the  Massoretic 
text  by  a  Jew  in  the  VIII.  century,  and  is  of  no  critical  value. 

We  know  not  the  date  or  the  author  of  the  Arabic  text  of 
Joshua  published  by  Walton.  There  are  also  Arabic  fragments 
of  Kings,  and  of  Ezra  whose  origin  is  uncertain. 

There  is  also  a  version  of  the  Pentateuch  made  by  Abou 
Said,  a  Samaritan  at  an  uncertain  date  ranging  between  the  X. 
and  XIII.  centuries.  It  was  made  from  the  Hebrew  text  in 
Samaritan  characters  of  the  Samaritan  Codex. 

The  Arabic  text  of  the  Prophets  which  appears  in  Walton's 
Polyglott,  was  made  from  the  Septuagint,  and  Theodotion's 
version  of  Daniel.  The  Arabic  text  of  the  other  books  which 
appears  therein  was  made  also  from  the  Greek  at  uncertain 
dates,  but  all  later  than  the  X.  century. 

The  Arabic  text  of  the  New  Testament  was  made  directly 
from  the  Greek.  Its  date  is  unknown,  but  the  eighth  century 
would  be  the  earliest  possible  date. 

The  Persian  Pentateuch  of  Walton  was  made  by  a  Jew  of 
the  XVI.  century.  It  follows  the  Massoretic  text  servilely, 
and  is  of  small  critical  worth.  The  Persian  text  of  the  Gospels 
which  was  made  from  the  Greek,  is  assigned  to  the  XIV. 
century.  Other  versions  may  exist,  but  they  have  not  been 
studied. 


THE    VULGATE.  625 

Chapter  XXVIII. 
Jerome  and  the  Vulgate. 

We  have  sufificiently  discoursed  of  the  causes  and  move- 
ments which  led  up  to  Jerome's  great  translation,  which,  from 
its  constant  and  universal  use  in  the  Church  of  God,  has  been 
aptly  called  the  VULGATE. 

It  was  in  his  cell  at  Bethlehem,  about  the  year  389,  that 
Jerome  began  his  great  work.  His  design  was  not  favored  bjr 
the  clergy  of  Rome,  who  accused  him  of  endeavoring  to  set 
aside  the  Septuagint  and  the  Vetus  Itala.  He  declares  that 
such  was  not  his  intent,  but  only  to  furnish  a  translation  that 
the  Jews  could  not  reject  in  controversy  with  the  Christians. 
Jerome  never  foresaw  the  great  results  that  were  to  follow 
from  his  labors.  He  began  with  the  books  of  Samuel  and 
Kings.  In  393  he  had  completed  these,  together  with  the 
sixteen  Prophets,  the  Psalter  and  Job.  The  work  was  then 
intermitted  for  some  time.  In  395  he  translated  Ezra  and 
Chronicles.  These  were  followed  by  a  translation  of  Proverbs, 
Ecclesiastes  and  the  Canticle  of  Canticles.  The  work  of 
translating  the  Pentateuch,  Joshua,  Judges  and  Ruth  was 
begun  in  398  and  terminated  in  404.  Some  time  in  this 
period,  Jerome  translated  Tobias  and  Judith  from  the  Chaldaic 
text. 

This  translation  of  the  Psalter  was  never  received  into 
common  use  by  the  Church.  The  probable  cause  was,  the 
danger  of  scandal  to  the  common  people,  who  committed  much 
of  the  Psalter  to  memory.  Had  Jerome's  translation  been 
substituted  for  the  old  text,  the  simple  people  would  have  been 
unable  to  reconcile  the  wide  divergency  of  the  two  texts  with 
their  reverence  for  Holy  Scripture. 

What  we  have  written  of  Jerome's  life  and  labors,  places  in 
clear  light  his  relation  to  our  approved  Vulgate. 

Jerome  was  guided  in  his  method  of  translation  by  two 
norms.  1. — The  great  and  principal  norm  was  to  reproduce 
the  sense,  not  binding  himself  to  text,  word  for  word.  What- 
ever may  be  Jerome's  declaration  concerning  his  work,  an  ex- 
amination of  the  Vulgate  will  reveal  this  general  design  running 
all  through  it.  Thus,  at  times,  he  changes  completely  the 
order  and  form  of  the  Hebrew  sentence  ;  again,  he  avoids  the 
excessive  minuteness  of  description  and  frequent  repetitions  of 
the  same  text.  The  following  two  examples  will  illustrate 
this : 


626 


THE    VULGATE. 


Genesis  XXXIX.  19-20.  (Vul- 
gate). 

"His  master  hearing  these 
things,  and  giving  too  much 
credit  to  his  wife's  words,  was 
very  angry,  and  cast  Joseph  into 
the  prison,  where  the  King's 
prisoners  were  kept,  and  he  was 
there  shut  up." 


Genesis  XXXIX.  19—20.  (Lit- 
eral Hebrew). 

"And  it  came  to  pass,  when 
his  master  heard  the  words  of 
his  wife,  which  she  spake  unto 
him,  saying  :  after  this  manner 
did  thy  servant  to  me  ;  that  his 
wrath  was  kindled.  And  Joseph's 
master  took  him,  and  put  him 
into  the  prison,  a  place  where 
the  King's  prisoners  were  bound  : 
and  he  was  there  in  the  prison." 

Exodus   XL.    12 — 15.       (He- 
brew). 

"  And  thou  shalt  bring  Aaron 
and  his  sons  unto  the  door  of  the 
tabernacle  of  the  covenant,  and 
wash  them  with  water.  And 
thou  shalt  put  upon  Aaron  the 
holy  garments,  and  anoint  him, 
and  sanctify  him,  that  he  may 
minister  unto  me  in  the  priest's 
office.  And  thou  shalt  bring  his 
sons,  and  clothe  them  with  coats  : 
And  thou  shalt  anoint  them,  as 
thou  didst  anoint  their  father, 
that  they  may  minister  unto  me 
in  the  priests  office  :  for  their 
anointing  shall  surely  be  an 
everlasting  priesthood  through- 
out their  generations." 

Jerome  omits  two  whole  verses,  and  condenses  their  im- 
port in  the  other  two. 

This  is  praised  by  some  as  a  certain  elegance  in  Latin  diction, 
but  I  must  confess  I  would  prefer  the  quaint  simplicity  of  the 
old  text  with  no  abridgment. 

At  times  Jerome  has  failed  to  apprehend  the  sense  of  the 
Hebrew.     The  following  is  a  notable  example : 

Gen.  XLIX.  22.    (Hebrew). 


Exodus  XL.  12-13.  (Vulgate). 

"  And  thou  shalt  bring  Aaron 
and  his  sons  to  the  door  of  the 
tabernacle  of  the  covenant,  and 
having  washed  them  with  water, 
thou  shalt  put  on  them  the  holy 
vestments,  that  they  may  minister 
to  me,  and  that  the  unction  of 
them  may  prosper  to  an  everlast- 
ing priesthood." 


"Joseph  is  a  fruitful  son 
(bough),  a  fruitful  son  (planted) 
by  the  fountain  whose  branches 
run  over  the  wall." 


Gen.  XLIX.  22.    (Vulgate). 

"Joseph  is  a  growing  son,  a 
growing  son  and  comely  to  be- 
hold :  the  daughters  run  to  and 
fro  upon  the  wall." 


THE    VULGATE.  627 

It  is  evident  that  the  holy  text  likens  Joseph  to  a  vine 
planted  in  well  irrigated  soil ;  and  Joseph's  prosperity  is  likened 
to  the  healthy  growth  of  this  vine  which  sends  forth  its  shoots 
upon  the  wall.  It  is  easy  to  see  that  this  is  more  congruous 
to  the  grave  sense  of  Scripture,  than  the  picture  of  maidens 
running  about  on  an  eminence  to  see  the  beautiful  Joseph. 

Again  when  Jerome  essays  to  translate  proper  names  into 
their  supposed  signification,  he  also  errs. 

The  following  text  will  illustrate  this  assertion  : 

Joshua  XIV.   15.      (Hebrew.)  Joshua  XIV.  15.    (Vulgate). 

"And  the  name  of  Hebron  be-  "  The  name  of  Hebron  before 

fore  was  Kirjath-Arba  (the  city  was  called  Cariath-Arbe  ;  Adam, 
of  Arba)  who  was  a  great  man  the  greatest  among  the  Enacim 
among  the  Anakim.  And  the  was  laid  there ;  and  the  land 
land  had  rest  from  war."  rested  from  wars." 

The  sense  is  simply  that  Hebron  was  called  the  city  of 
Arba,  who  had  been  a  great  hero  of  the  Anakim.  How  far 
Jerome  has  departed  from  this  sense,  we  leave  the  reader  to 
judge.     Again : 

II.  Ezra  IX.  7.    (Hebrew.)  II.  Ezra  IX.  7.     (Vulgate.) 

"  Thou  art  the  Lord  God,  who  "  Thou,  O  Lord  God,  art  he 

didst  choose  Abram,  and  brought-  who  chosest  Abram,  and  brought- 
est  him  forth  out  of  Ur,  the  Chal-  est  him  forth  out  of  the  fire  of 
deans,  and  gavest  him  the  name  the  Chaldeans,  and  gavest  him 
of  Abraham."  the  name  of  Abraham." 

It  is  plain  that  the  inspired  text  wishes  to  state,  that  Abram 
was  called  by  God  out  of  the  Chaldean  city  Ur.  Jerome's 
love  for  Hebrew  led  him  to  accept  much  from  the  rabbis,  and 
here  they  have  deceived  him. 

Sometimes,  in  things  relating  to  the  substantial  sense,  he  has 
failed  to  catch  the  meaning.  An  example  of  this  is  the  fol- 
lowing passage : 

Exodus  XXXIII.  13.    (Literal 

Hebrew.)  Exodus  XXIII.  13.  (Vulgate.) 

**  And  in  all  things  that  I  have  "  Keep  all  things  that  I  have 

said  unto  you,  be  circumspect :  said  to  you.  And  by  the  name  of 
and  make  no  mention  of  the  name  strange  gods  thou  shalt  not  swear, 
of  other  gods,  neither  let  it  be  neither  shall  it  be  heard  out  of 
heard  out  of  your  mouth."  your  mouth." 

The  precept  is  against  idolatry,  not  against  profanity. 
A  similar  serious  defect  occurs  in  the  well  known  passage 
of  Isaiah  XL  10,  wherein  Jerome  translates  the  close  of  the 
verse:     " — and  his    peace  will  be  glorious,"  by :  " — and  his 


528  THE    VULGATE. 

sepulchre  will  be  glorious."  The  Prophet  predicted  the 
glorious  reign  of  Christ,  which  succeeded  to  his  period  of  suf- 
fering, and  not,  as  the  Vulgate  leads  some  to  believe,  the 
honor  that  is  paid  to  the  Holy  Sepulchre. 

Although  these  and  certain  other  such  defects  occur  in  the 
Vulgate  of  Jerome,  it  remains,  in  the  main,  the  best  of  all  the 
versions  of  Scripture.  This  is  even  admitted  by  rationalists 
and  protestants.* 

A  translator  is  not  an  inspired  agent,  and  these  few  de- 
fects simply  show  that  the  translation  was  a  human  work. 
The  world  has  been  studying  languages,  studying  the  Scrip- 
tures, thinking,  and  writing  for  a  decade  and  a  half  of  centuries 
since  Jerome  lived,  and  it  is  not  strange  that  in  a  few  cases 
some  slight  betterment  could  be  now  wrought  in  his  transla- 
tion, but  considering  the  time  and  circumstances  in  which  it 
was  done,  the  translation  of  Jerome  must  ever  remain  one  of 
the  great  works  of  man. 

The  labors  of  Jerome  met  with  much  opposition,  both 
during  his  life  and  after  his  death.  Jerome's  character  was  one 
to  antagonize  a  certain  element  of  mankind.  He  was  a  man 
of  power,  high-minded,  noble,  intolerant  of  baseness  and 
pettiness.  By  his  talents  he  had  outstripped  his  fellows,  and 
then  had  to  look  down  upon  the  envy  of  those  of  a  lower 
plane.  His  prefaces  to  the  several  books,  and  his  letters  to 
friends,  show  that  he  was  not  of  a  temper  of  mind  to  conciliate 
his  opponents  by  bland  words. 

These  opponents  decried  Jerome  and  his  work  on  the  plea 
that  he  was  attacking  the  Septuagint,  which  had  been  prac- 
tically adopted  by  the  Church.  But  there  was  another  element 
in  the  opposition,  composed  of  good  men,  who,  actuated  by 
zeal  for  the  Church,  feared  that  the  people  would  be  scandal- 
ized by  this  new  presentation  of  the  truths  of  Scripture,  with 
which,  in  the  old  form,  they  were  now  familiar.    St.  Augustine 

*Haevemick  ^in\.  I.  p.  444:  "  Seine  im  Ganzen  sehr  wahren  hermeneu- 
tischen  Principien  *  *  *  Machen  seine  Arbeit  zu  einer  der  ausgezeichnet- 
8ten  Leistungen  des  kirchl.  Alterthums."  Keil  Einl.  p.  572:  "  Seine  Uebersetz- 
ung  *  *  *  abertrifft  alle  alten  Versionen  an  Grenauigkeit  und  Treue.'' 
Uti  "orthodoxi,"  ita  rationalistae  quoque,  inter  quos  De  Wette-Schrader  Einl. 
p.  137:  "Vermoege  seiner  Sorgfalt  *  *  *  brachte  er  vieleicht  das 
VortrefflicTiste  zu  Stande,  was  in  dieser  Art  das  ganze  Alterthum  auf  zuweisen 
hat."  Bleek-WellliaiLsen  Einl.  p.  598:  "Die  Arbeit  im  Ganzen  ist  von  unbe- 
fangenen  Richtern  allezeit  b\b  sehr  gelungen  anerkannt."  Diestel  Gesch.  des 
A.  T.  p.  93:  "Unmittelbar  aus  demHebr.  Text  geschcepft,  meist  in  moeglichst 
gewandter  Sprache,  mehr  auf  die  Wiedergabe  des  rechten  Sinnes  als  auf  skla- 
vische  Wcertlichkeit  gerichtet,  erhielt  sie  mit  vollem  Becht  den  Bang  einer 
Vulgata"  etc.    (Apud  Comely,  op.  cit.) 


THE    VULGATE.  529 

was  of  this  number,  but  towards  the  end  of  his  life,  he  was 
more  favorably  disposed  to  Jerome's  translation,  which  he 
commended  and  used. 

There  was  no  sudden  transition  from  the  old  to  the  new 
version.  It  was  a  gradual  movement,  sustained  by  the  intrinsic 
excellence  of  the  Vulgate. 

The  earliest  and  most  universal  endorsement  of  Jerome's 
translation  came  from  Gaul.  Cassian  (t432),  during  Jerome's 
life,  called  it  the  more  correct  edition.  Soon  after  his  death, 
Eucherius  of  Lyon  (t454),  Vincent  of  Lerins  (t45o).  Prosper 
(t45o),  Sedulius  (t45o),  Avitus  (t532),  and  Caesarius  of  Aries 
(f  542)  adopted  it  as  the  received  text  of  Scripture. 

At  Rome,  during  the  fifth  and  sixth  centuries,  the  drift 
was  decidedly  in  favor  of  the  Vetus  Itala.  against  the  Vulgate. 
St.  Leo  the  Great  (440-461)  and  Pope  Hilary  (461-468)  made 
some  use  of  the  Vulgate.  With  John  IIL  (560-578)  the  tide 
set  in  strongly  towards  the  Vulgate,  and  St.  Gregory  the 
Great  (590-604),  who  considered  the  Vulgate  the  truer  transla- 
tion, is  witness  that  only  small  use  was  made  in  his  day  of 
the  Vetus  Itala.  From  that  time  forth  the  Vetus  Itala  was 
neglected,  and  Jerome's  translation  became,  in  very  deed,  the 
Vulgate.  St.  Isidore  of  Seville  (t636)  declares  that  Jerome's 
translation  "  is  universally  used,  for  the  reason  that  it  is  truer 
in  its  sense,  and  clearer  in  its  diction."  (De.  Oil.  I.  12).  Ven.  Bede, 
(t735)  rnade  almost  exclusive  use  of  the  Vulgate.  Rhabanus 
Maurus  and  Walafrid  Strabo  declare,  that  "  in  the  principal 
books  the  whole  Church  of  Rome  uses  the  translation  of 
Jerome."  (Instit.  Cler.  II.  54.)  The  ascendancy  of  the  Vul- 
gate was  accomplished,  not  by  any  official  decree,  but  by  the 
steady  growth  of  the  recognition  of  its  excellence. 

The  mode  of  diffusion  of  written  data  of  those  days  made 
them  greatly  liable  to  corruption.  When  a  book  is  printed,  it 
is  fixed  and  unchangeable.  But  in  the  old  days,  when  the 
publishing  of  a  book  was  by  means  of  manuscripts  written  by 
men  who  were  ever  prone,  either  by  ignorance  or  negligence, 
to  permit  errors,  or  by  active,  arbitrary  design,  to  insert  certain 
judgments  of  their  own  into  the  text,  the  more  a  book  was 
copied  the  more  it  was  corrupted ;  for  it  was  made  to  reflect 
something  of  every  one  through  whose  hands  it  had  passed. 
This  was  augmented,  in  the  case  of  the  Vulgate,  by  the  con- 
temporaneous existence  for  centuries  of  the  two  Latin  versions. 
Passages  were  copied  from  one  into  the  other.  There  was 
much  revision,  and  re-revision,  remodeling,  and  sciolism,  till 
the  two  texts  were  well  mixed  and  corrupted.     Hugh  of  St. 

HH 


530        THE  CORRECTORIA  OF  THE  VULGATE. 

Victor,  testifies  of  this  state  as  follows :  "It  has  come  about  by 
a  perverse  usage,  since  different  ones  follow  different  transla- 
tions, that  both  are  now  so  mixed  that  no  man  knows  what  is 
proper  to  each  text."     (Pat.  Lat.  Migne,  175,  17.) 

Learned  men  arose  in  the  Church  and  strove  to  remedy 
this  evil.  Cassiodorus  emended  the  text  for  his  monks. 
Alcuin,  at  the  bidding  of  Charlemagne,  revised  the  entire 
Latin  version,  and  presented  the  corrected  copy  to  Charlemagne 
in  801.  From  this  text  were  made  the  Bibles  of  Alcuin,  or  of 
Charlemagne,  as  they  are  sometimes  called.  They  were  much 
in  use  up  to  the  thirteenth  century.  Many  of  the  codices  of 
the  Vulgate  are  of  this  recension. 

Other  corrections  were  made  by  St.  Peter  Damian  (f  1072), 
St.  Lanfranc  of  Canterbury  (fio89),  and  the  Cistercian  St. 
Stephen  (tii34)- 

As  the  corruption  was  universal  in  character,  these  private 
efforts  were  inadequate  to  remedy  the  evil.  Hence,  in  the 
thirteenth  century,  theologians  formulated  a  design  for  an 
Apparatus  Criticus,  which  should  serve  as  a  norm  to  correct 
all  texts.  The  data  of  the  Apparatus  Criticus  were  taken  from 
the  old  codices,  from  the  writings  of  the  Fathers,  from  the 
commentaries  of  Jerome,  from  the  Glossary  of  Strabo,  and  the 
interlinear  Glossary  of  Stephen  Langton.  Some  collation  was 
also  made  with  the  original  texts.  The  results  of  these  labors 
were,  in  1226,  embodied  in  the  Correctorium  of  Paris. 

This  work  afterwards  received  the  approbation  of  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Sens,  Primate  of  Gaul,  for  which  cause  it  is  some- 
times called  the  Correctorium  Senonense.  This  work  of  the 
University  of  Paris  in  no  wise  benefitted  the  text.  It  was  simply 
the  multiplication  of  a  poor  text,  with  some  additional  corrup- 
tion, so  that  Roger  Bacon  said  of  it :  "  Textus  pro  majori  parte 
horribiliter  corruptus  est  *  ''^  *  et  ubi  non  habet  corrup- 
tionem,  habet  tantam  dubitationem  quae  merito  cadit  in 
omnem  Sapientem."     (Apud  Hody,  De  Text.  Orig.) 

The  method  employed  by  those  who  wrought  the  Cor- 
rectoria  of  the  thirteenth  century  was  to  note  down  on  the 
margin  of  a  manuscript  copy  of  the  text  the  judgments  con- 
cerning individual  passages.  Hence,  we  find  in  the  margin : 
"  est  de  textu,"  "  non  est  de  textu,"  "  vera  est  litera,"  "  falsa 
est  litera,"  etc.  Sometimes,  also,  the  margins  contain  different 
readings  from  other  manuscripts.  The  critical  worth  of  these 
Correctoria  is  to  us  considerable. 

The  Dominican  Chapter  of  France  in  1256,  condemned  the 
Correctorium  of  Sens,  and  proscribed  its  use  in  the  Order. 


THE  CORRECTORIA  OF  THE  VULGATE.        531 

Some  efforts  had  been  made  by  the  Dominicans  to  have  a 
corrected  and  uniform  text,  but  the  first  work  worthy  of  note 
was  executed  by  Hugh  de  St.  Cher,  general  of  the  Order.  As 
Hugh  knew  Hebrew,  he  essayed  to  remove  all  glosses  from 
the  Vulgate,  and  restore  it  to  its  pristine  state.  He  made  no 
use  of  old  MSS.,  but  corrected  it  according  to  the  Hebrew 
and  Greek.  It  is  more  a  second  translation  than  a  critical  re- 
cension of  the  Vulgate. 

There  were  some  other  minor  Correctoria  executed  by  the 
Dominicans,  of  which  but  little  is  known.  Albertus  Magnus, 
St.  Thomas,  and  other  theologians  employed  the  texts  of 
Scripture  as  found  in  the  Correctorium  of  the  Dominicans. 
Although  great  erudition  and  labor  was  expended  on  this 
work,  it  failed  through  a  defective  critique.  They  had,  in  a 
measure,  substituted  their  work  for  the  work  of  Jerome,  and 
Jerome's  work  was  the  better.  They  had  also  placed  in  the 
margin  many  readings  judged  to  be  erroneous,  underlining 
them  in  red,  or  affixing  to  them  some  other  sign,  that  readers 
might  be  warned  against  them.  In  time  the  indications  were 
unobserved,  and  the  readings  crept  into  the  text.  Roger 
Bacon,  with  a  certain  element  of  hatred  against  the  Domin- 
icans, said  of  this  text :  "  Eorum  correctio  est  pessima  corruptio, 
et  destruitur  textus  Dei ;  et  longe  minus  malum  est  uti  exem- 
plari  Parisiensi  non  correcto  quam  eorum  correctione."  (Apud 
Hody,  1.  c.) 

The  Correctorium  of  the  Franciscans  has  been  erroneously 
termed  the  Correctorium  of  the  Sorbonne,  from  the  fact  that 
it  became  known  from  a  manuscript  of  the  Sorbonne,  which  is 
at  present  in  the  National  Library  in  Paris  (Latin  15554).  Its 
method  was  similar  to  that  of  the  Dominicans,  but  of  its  value 
I  know  nothing.  The  Correctorium  of  the  Vatican,  so  called 
from  its  MSS.  in  the  Vatican,  was  executed  about  the  begin- 
ning of  the  fourteenth  century  by  William  DeMara,  a  Fran- 
ciscan of  Oxford.  The  man  was  a  disciple  of  Bacon,  and  his 
work  shows  much  erudition  and  critique.  He  made  use  of 
Hebrew  and  Greek,  not  to  supplant  the  version  of  Jerome,  but 
to  perfect  it.  His  Correctorium  is  the  best  of  all.  He  fails 
ometimes,  especially  in  Greek,  of  which  he  knew  less  than  of 
Hebrew. 

Many  other  Correctoria  existed  which  merit  no  mention 
here. 

We  insert  here  some  mention  of  a  few  of  the  principal 
manuscripts  of  the  Vulgate. 

Chief  among  these  is  the  CODEX  Amiatinus. 


532  CHIEF   MANUSCRIPTS   OF   THE  VULGATE. 

This  manuscript,  the  most  celebrated,  if  not  the  oldest  of 
the  Vulgate  of  Jerome,  belongs  to  the  Laurentian  Library  at 
Florence.  It  is  registered  Amiatinus  I.,  because  it  is  one  of 
the  manuscripts,  which  were  brought  from  the  Abbey  of 
Mount  Amiato,  near  Sienna,  to  the  aforesaid  monastery,  at 
the  time  of  the  Abbey's  suppression  in  1786.  The  Script  is  the 
uncial  lettering  of  Italian  calligraphy.  The  parchment  is 
divided  in  cahiers  of  sixteen  pages  each.  Every  page  has  two 
columns  of  text,  and  each  column  forty-four  lines.  The  whole 
width  of  the  initial  letters  of  the  verses  or  stichs  is  displayed 
on  the  margin  of  the  MSS,  There  is  no  punctuation.  The 
text  is  divided  into  stichs.  It  has  no  adorned  initials, 
such  as  the  beautiful  ones  we  see  in  the  manuscripts 
of  the  Carlovingian  epoch.  Its  height  is  fifty  centimetres,  its 
width  thirty-four.  The  manuscript  forms  only  one  volume  of 
one  thousand  and  twenty-nine  leaves.  It  contains  the  whole 
text  of  the  Vulgate,  every  book  prefaced  by  an  introduction 
or  prologue  by  St.  Jerome. 

On  the  back  of  the  first  page  of  the  manuscript  is  read  the 
following  inscription  in  verse : 

"  Coenobium  ad  eximii  merito  venerabile  Salvatoris, 

Quern  caput  Ecclesiae  dedicat  alta  fides, 

Petrus  Langobardorum  extremis  de  finib.  abbas 

Devoti  affectus  pignora  mitto  mei, 

Meque  meos  optans  tanti  inter  gaudia  patris 

In  coelis  memorem  semper  habere  locum." 

The  meaning  of  this  dedication  is :  "  Peter,  Abbot  at  the 
boundaries  of  the  country  of  the  Lombards,  sends  this  pledge 
of  his  tender  devotion  to  the  venerable  monastery  of  the 
Saviour,  which  faith  looks  upon  as  the  head  of  the  Church." 

The  Abbot  Peter  is  unknown.  The  expression,  head  of 
the  Church,  applied  to  the  monastery  of  Mt.  Amiato  is  very 
strange.  Moreover,  the  words  "  Coenobium  ",  "  Salvatoris  ", 
and  "  Petrus  Langobardorum  "  are  words  written  by  a  second 
hand  upon  an  erasure.  Evidently  the  dedication  of  the 
manuscript  was  defaced  at  the  time  of  the  change  of  owner- 
ship. The  question  has  engaged  many  to  ascertain  for  whom 
the  manuscript  was  originally  intended.  Bandini  of  the  last 
century,  in  drawing  up  a  catalogue  of  the  Laurentian  manu- 
scripts, proposed  to  correct  the  first  verse  as  follows :  "  Cul- 
men  ad  eximii  merito  venerabile  Petri."  The  hexameter  is  re- 
stored at  the  same  time,  and  the  first  verse  is  made  to  agree 
with  the  second :     "  Quem  caput  Ecclesiae  dedicat  alta  fides." 


CHIEF   MANUSCRIPTS   OF   THE   VULGATE.  533 

Thus  it  would  result  that  the  manuscript  were  one  offered 
to  the  Roman  Church,  caput  Ecclesiae.  For  the  ''  Petrus  Lan- 
gobardorum ",  Bandini  proposed  to  substitute  "  Servandus 
LatUr  In  fact,  at  the  beginning  of  Leviticus,  we  read  the 
name  of  such  copyist,  who  labored  at  the  production  of  the  manu- 
script. We  know  of  an  Abbot  Servandus  of  the  sixth  century, 
a  friend  of  St.  Benedict  of  the  neighborhood  of  Alatri,  on  the 
boundaries  of  Latium.  The  Codex  Amiatinus  was  thus  con- 
sidered a  manuscript  of  the  sixth  century,  of  Italian  origin  :  it 
has  been  accepted  as  such  by  Tischendorf. 

The  finding  of  the  authentic  original,  and  the  age  of  the 
Codex  Amiatinus,  is  one  of  the  most  brilliant  discoveries  of  M. 
de  Rossi.  In  a  memoir  on  the  sources  of  the  library  of  the 
Holy  See,  published  in  1886,  which  memoir  is  used  as  a  preface 
to  the  catalogues  of  the  Vatican  library,  he  relates  how  in  the 
seventh  or  eighth  century,  the  bishops  and  the  abbots  outside 
of  Italy  desired  much  to  receive  manuscripts  from  the  Popes, 
so  that  Pope  Martin(649 — 653)  could  write:  "Codices  jam 
exinaniti  sunt  a  nostra  bibliotheca,  unde  ei  (the  carrier  of  the 
letter)  dare  nuUatenus  habuimus ;  transcribere  autem  non 
potuit,  quoniam  festinanter  de  haec  civitate  egredi  pro- 
peravit." 

Benedict  Biscop,  the  founder  of  the  Abbeys  of  Wearmouth 
and  Yarrow,  was  one  of  those  prelates  of  the  seventh  cen- 
tury, devout  to  the  things  and  books  of  Rome.  Five  times  (in 
653,  658,  671,  678  and  in  684),  he  made  pilgrimages  to  Rome, 
bringing  back  every  time,  according  to  Bede's  testimony,  "in- 
numerabilem  librorum  omnis  generis  copiam."  At  his  death 
he  left  to  his  two  Abbeys  "  bibliothecam  quam  de  Roma  nobi- 
lissimam  copiosissimamque  advexerat." 

His  successor  was  Ceolfrid,  who  was  the  master  of  Bede, 
of  whom  Bede  tells  us,  that  he  took  a  great  care  of  Benedict 
Biscops's  library,  and  had  three  manuscripts  of  the  Holy 
Scripture  executed  according  to  a  copy  brought  from 
Rome,  and  that  he  gave  a  copy  to  each  of  his  two  Abbeys, 
Wearmouth  and  Yarrow,  and  then,  when  he  started  for  Rome, 
he  took  the  third  copy,  in  order  to  offer  it  to  the  Holy  See. 
Ceolfrid  died  on  the  way,  at  Langres,  Sept.  25,  716.  But  the 
monks,  who  accompanied  him,  proceeded  towards  the  Eternal 
City,  and  it  is  to  be  supposed,  that  they  accomplished  their 
Abbot's  intentions,  thus  expressed  by  Bede :  "  Inter  alia 
donaria  quae  afferre  disposuerat  misit  Ecclesiae  sancti  Petri 
pandectem  a  Beato  Hieronymo  in  Latinum  ex  Hebraeo  vel 
Graeco  fonte  translatum." 


534  CHIEF   MANUSCRIPTS   OF   THE   VULGATE. 

M.  de  Rossi  based  a  conjecture  upon  those  facts,  that  we 
should  read  in  the  dedicatory  of  the  Codex  Amiatinus,  neither 
''Petrus  Langobardorum"  nor  '' Servandus  Latii'\  but  '■'Ceol- 
fridus  Britonum."  The  two  words  proposed  by  M.  de  Rossi 
fitted  exactly  the  place  of  the  erasure.  The  poetical  quantity 
only  was  still  defective.  M.  Samuel  Berger  proposed  ''Ceolfri- 
dils  Anglorum" .  While  the  English  reviewers  were  theorizing 
for  and  against  this  conjecture,  which  brought  down  to  the 
eighth  century  the  most  important  manuscript  of  Jerome's 
Vulgate,  and  made  of  it  an  Anglo-Saxon  work.  M.  Hort 
pointed  out  in  an  anonymous  Life  of  Ceolfrtd,  very  likely 
Bede's  work,  published  for  the  first  time  in  1841,  a  passage  in 
which  it  is  related,  in  the  same  terms  as  above,  how  Ceolfrid 
had  made  three  copies  of  the  Roman  Bible  in  his  possession ; 
that  he  intended  to  offer  one  of  those  three  copies  to  the 
Church  of  St.  Peter  at  Rome ;  that  he  died  during  his  pilgrim- 
age ;  and  that  the  Bible  destined  for  St.  Peter's  bore  the  fol- 
lowing verses : 

"  Corpus  ad  eximii  merito  venerabile  Petri 
Dedicat  Ecclesiae  quern  caput  alta  fides, 
Ceolfridus,  Anglorum  extimis  de  finibus  abbas, 
Devoti  affectus  pignora  mitto  mei,  etc." 

We  could  not  wish  for  a  conjecture  a  more  perfect  verifi- 
cation. The  Codex  Amiatinus,  therefore,  was  executed  be- 
tween 690,  date  of  Benedict  Biscop's  death,  and  716,  and  rather 
about  690  than  towards  716,  in  Northumberland,  either  at 
Yarrow,  or  at  Wearmouth,  and  it  is  the  copy  of  a  manuscript 
of  Jerome's  Vulgate  brought  from  Rome. 

Men  have  endeavored  to  come  to  still  more  precise  judg- 
ments concerning  the  Codex.  As  it  has  a  prologue  on  the 
divisions  of  the  Bible  in  books,  almost  identical  with  that  found 
in  "  De  Institutione  Divinarum  Litterarum  "  of  Cassiodorus, 
some  believe  that  the  Amiatinus  had  been  taken  from  Cas- 
siodorus' library.  The  problem  had  been  proposed  by  M. 
Corssen,  Die  Bibeln  des  Cassiodorius  und  der  Codex  Amiati- 
nus, in  the  Jahrbiicher  fiir  protestantische  Theologie,  Leip- 
zig, 1883,  p.  619 — 633.  The  question  was  examined  again  in 
England,  in  1887,  by  Wordworth,  Hort,  Browne,  etc. 

It  can  be  considered  as  certain,  that  the  Codex  Amiatinus 
is  absolutely  independent  from  Cassiodorus,  and  also  that  the 
prologue  on  the  divisions  of  the  Bible,  which  fills  up  the  first 
sheets  of  the  Amiatinus  is  of  Cassiodorian  origin,  but  was  not 
made  for  the  Amiatinus.  (See  the  article  of  Mr.  Corssen  in 
the  -'Academy"  of  April  17,  1888.) 


CHIEF   MANUSCRIPTS   OF   THE  VULGATE.  635 

The  Codex  Amiatinus  is  at  present  held  to  represent  the 
most  ancient  condition  of  Jerome's  Vulgate,  that  is  to  say,  it 
approaches  closest  to  the  text  executed  by  Jerome.  It  played 
a  considerable  part  in  the  history  of  the  Vulgate  in  the  middle 
age. 

"  It  is  from  Northumberland  that  the  good  texts  of  the 
Vulgate  have  been  spread,  not  only  in  Italy,  to  whom  England 
paid  thus  its  debt,  but  moreover,  in  France,  for  Alcuin  came 
from  York  and  was  selected  by  Charles  the  Great  (Charle- 
magne), for  correcting  the  text  of  the  Bible." — Samuel  Berger, 
De  r  Histoire  de  la  Vulgate  en  France,  Paris,  1887,  p.  4. 

Again,  it  is  known  that  the  Codex  Amiatinus  has  been 
made  use  of  for  the  constitution  of  the  text  of  the  Sixtine 
edition  of  the  Vulgate. 

Tischendorf  published  the  text  of  the  New  Testament  of 
the  Codex  Amiatinus,  C.  Tischendorf,  Novum  Testamentum 
ex  Codice  Amiatino,  Leipzig,  1890 — 1894.  See  Bandini,  Bib- 
liotheca  Leopoldina  Laurentiana.  Florence,  1891,  t.  I.,  p. 
701 — 732 ;  Wordsworth,  Novum  Testamentum  Latine,  p.  XL, 
Oxford,  1889;  De  Rossi,  La  Biblia  offerta  da  Ceolfrido  abbate 
al  sepulcro  di  S.  Pietro.  Rome,  1888  ;  J.  White,  The  Codex 
Amiatinus  and  its  birth-place  in  the  Studia  Biblica,  Oxford, 
1870,  t.  II,  p.  273 — 308.    (P.  Batifol  in  Dictionnaire  de  la  Bible.) 

The  next  great  Codex  of  the  Vulgate  is  the  CODEX  FUL- 
DENSIS.  It  contains  only  the  entire  New  Testament,  and  can 
not  be  made  equal  to  Codex  Amiatinus.  Its  colophon  declares 
that  it  was  made  under  the  supervision  of  Victor,  Bishop  of 
Capua.  Victor  ascended  the  Episcopal  throne  in  541.  From 
the  Roman  dates  aflfixed  to  the  instrument,  chronographers 
establish  that  it  was  finished  in  546. 

St.  Boniface,  the  Apostle  of  Germany,  is  believed  to  have 
carried  the  Codex  into  Germany,  and  it  is  not  improbable  that 
he  had  the  Codex  with  him  when  he  was  martyred  in  Frisia 
in  755. 

The  Codex  bears  certain  explanatory  notes  from  the  hand 
of  Boniface. 

It  is  preserved  at  Fulda.  It  has  been  published  and  accu- 
rately described  by  E.  Reinke,  Marbourg,  t868. 

The  Codex  Toletanus  contains  all  the  books  of  both 
Testaments,  except  Baruch.  It  is  written  in  Gothic  capital 
characters,  hence  it  is  sometimes  called  the  Gothic  Codex. 
It  was  used  in  the  Sixtine  and  Clementine  correction  of  the 
Vulgate.  Its  date  is  placed  in  the  eighth  century.  It  is  the 
present  property  of  the  metropolitan  Church  of  Toledo. 


636  CHIEF  MANUSCRIPTS   OF  THE  VULGATE. 

The  Codex  Bobbiensis  is  more  ancient  than  either  of 
these.  It  belongs  to  the  National  Library  of  Turin  ;  it  is  de- 
signated in  the  Latin  Apparatus  Criticus  by  the  minuscule 
letter  h. 

The  Codex  forms  a  quarto  volume  of  96  leaves  of  fine 
parchment.  The  leaves  measure  185  millimetres  by  165.  The 
pages  contain  one  column  of  14  lines.  The  Script  is  uncial, 
without  ornament.  Its  date  is  placed  in  the  fifth  century  ;  and 
it  must  thus  be  considered  as  one  of  the  most  ancient  of  the 
New  Testament.  Traces  of  two  correctors  are  recognizable  in 
the  text.  One  of  these  was  contemporary  with  the  original 
scribe ;  the  other  more  modern,  is  believed  from  the  Irish 
characters  used  to  be  St.  Columban. 

The  Codex  in  its  present  state  only  contains  the  following 
fragments  of  Matthew  and  Mark:  Math.  I.  i  to  III.  10;  IV. 
2  to  XIV.  17;  XV.  26— 30;  Mark  VIII.  8— 11,  14—16,  and 
from  VIII.  19  to  XVI.  9. 

It  is  estimated  that  the  MS.  originally  consisted  of  415 
leaves.  The  first  256  leaves  are  lost.  The  fragment  that  re- 
mains is  believed  to  be  a  portion  of  the  33d  cahier ;  the  follow- 
ing twenty  are  lost.  It  originally  contained  only  the  Gospels, 
written  in  the  following  order:  John,  Luke,  Mark,  Matthew. 
This  order  also  obtains  in  the  Codex  Monacensis  X  of  the 
Gospels. 

A  modern  note  that  Tischendorf  read  on  the  Codex,  but 
which  has  since  disappeared,  made  known  that  the  Codex, 
according  to  tradition  was  one  that  St.  Columban  used  to  carry 
in  his  wallet.  St.  Columban  was  born  about  the  year  543,  in 
Leinster.  In  613  he  passed  the  Alps,  and  founded  at  a  short 
distance  from  Piacenza,  the  monastery  of  Bobbio,  where  he 
died  in  615.  The  Irish  pilgrims  were  wont  to  carry  the  Scrip- 
tures in  leathern  wallets,  "  sacculi  pellicei  ",  and  the  celebrated 
Irish  Bible  known  as  the  Book  of  Armagh  is  enclosed  in  its 
leathern  case.  The  identification  of  the  Codex  Bobbiensis 
with  St.  Columban  is  a  possible  hypothesis  but  not  an  estab- 
lished fact.  After  the  Renaissance,  the  MSS.  of  Bobbio  were 
distributed  in  the  great  libraries  of  Europe,  and  this  Codex 
found  its  resting  place  at  Turin.  It  was  edited  by  Fleck  in 
1837;  by  Tischendorf  in  1847;  ^^^  by  Wordsworth  and 
Sanday  in  1886. 

The  Latin  versions  before  the  time  of  Jerome  can  be  re- 
duced to  three  groups:  i. — The  African,  conformable  to  the 
citations  of  Scripture  of  St.  Cyprian  ;  2. — The  European, 
which  circulated  in  Western  Europe  during  the   IV.  century ; 


NEW   TRANSLATIONS   OF  THE   VULGATE.  537 

3. — The  Italian,  whose  use  is  represented  by  St.  Augustine. 
The  Codex  of  Bobbio  is  a  faithful  exemplar  of  the  African 
text.  See  Codex  Bobbiensis  in  Vigouroux,  Dictionnaire  de  la 
Bible. 

The  Codex  Cavensis  is  a  MS.  of  Jerome's  Vulgate,  the 
property  of  the  Abbey  of  La  Cava,  near  Salerno.  It  consists 
of  303  leaves,  in  three  columns  of  54  and  55  lines.  The  titles 
and  prologues  are  in  uncial  characters ;  the  body  of  the  text  is 
in  minuscule  Roman  characters.  M.  Berger  advances  the 
theory  that  the  Codex  is  a  production  of  the  Visigoths  of 
Spain,  in  the  IX.  century,  if  not  of  the  end  of  the  VIII.  It 
contains  all  the  books  of  both  Testaments. 

The  Codex  Foroiuliensis  of  the  VI.  century,  formerly 
contained  the  four  Gospels,  but  now  is  mutilated  in  Mark. 

The  Codex  Ottobonianus  contains  the  Octateuch  com- 
plete, but  is  of  slight  worth. 

The  Codex  Paulinus  or  Carolinus,  and  The  Codex 
Statianus  or  Vallicellianus  of  the  IX.  century,  contain  all 
the  books  of  both  Testaments  of  the  recension  of  Alcuin.  They 
were  much  prized  by  Sirleti  and  others  in  the  emendation  of 
the  Vulgate. 

After  the  invention  of  printing  in  the  fifteenth  century,  the 
first  book  ever  printed  was  the  Vulgate  printed  at  Mainz,  in 
1450.  From  that  time  up  to  the  close  of  the  century,  great 
activity  was  exercised  in  the  printing  of  the  Latin  Vulgate, 
and  more  than  a  hundred  different  editions  were  printed  in  that 
period. 

But  little  critical  care  was  bestowed  on  these  early  editions, 
and  the  best  MSS.  were  not  employed,  so  that  they  are  of  no 
critical  worth. 

The  Dominican  Castellanus  issued  an  edition  at  Venice  in 
1506,  in  which  he  printed  some  marginal  readings,  collected 
principally  from  other  printed  editions.  The  first  real  critical 
edition  of  the  Vulgate  text  was  the  Complutensian,  whose  text 
is  excellent  for  that  time. 

After  the  rise  of  protestantism,  the  protestants  threw  off  all 
reverence  for  the  Vulgate.  They  changed  its  readings  at  will, 
and  made  to  themselves  new  editions  from  the  original 
texts. 

Catholics  also  engaged  in  this  movement.  Pagninus  and 
Card.  Cajetan  made  new  Latin  editions  from  the  original 
texts. 

The  Dominican  Sanctes  Pagninus  (fi  541)  and  Cajetan  made 
new  Latin  versions.     Augustine  Steuchus,  and  Isidore  Clarius, 


638  THE  AUTHORIZATION   OF   THE   VULGATE. 

revised  the  text  of  the  Vulgate  in  conformity  with  the  original 
texts.  Hittorp  endeavored,  in  his  edition  of  Cologne  in  1 530,  to 
restore  the  text  of  Jerome  to  its  original  purity. 

Robert  Etienne  collected  at  Paris  a  considerable  number 
of  codices  and  spent  upwards  of  twenty  years,  from  1528  to 
1528  and  beyond,  in  emending  the  text  of  the  Vulgate.  His 
labors  were  profitable  to  the  study  of  the  text,  but  he  unwisely 
inserted  certain  of  Calvin's  annotations  in  some  of  his  editions, 
and  drew  upon  his  work  the  censure  of  the  University  of  Paris. 
The  best  of  Etienne's  editions  is  that  of  1540,  and  the  faculty 
were  unwise  in  extending  their  censure  to  this  excellent  text, 
wherein  was  naught  of  Calvinism  or  other  error. 

Chapter  XXIX. 

The  Authorization  of  the  Vulgate  by  the  Council 

OF  Trent. 

On  the  17th  of  March,  1546,  in  the  general  session,  the 
Fathers  who  had  been  charged  to  investigate  the  status  of  the 
Latin  text  of  Scripture  reported  four  abuses.  Only  the  first 
two  are  relevant  to  our  present  theme. 

The  first  abuse  was  the  existence  of  many  Latin  versions 
of  the  Scriptures,  which  were  used  as  authentic  in  public  read- 
ings, disputations,  and  discourses.  The  remedy  suggested 
was  to  have  the  old  Vulgate  as  the  sole  authentic  edition  which 
all  should  use  as  authentic  in  all  public  reading,  and  in  the  ex- 
position and  preaching  of  Holy  Scripture  ;  and  that  no  one 
should  reject  it  or  impugn  its  truth  ;  and  not  thereby  to  detract 
aught  from  the  genuine  and  true  version  of  the  Seventy  In 
terpreters,  which  the  Apostles  sometimes  used,  nor  to  reject 
other  editions  which  help  to  find  the  source  of  the  authentic 
Vulgate. 

The  second  abuse  was  the  corruption  of  the  codices  of  the 
Vulgate. 

The  remedy  was  to  expurgate  and  amend  the  codices  and 
restore  to  the  Christian  world  the  genuine  text  of  the  Vulgate 
free  from  error.  And  the  Fathers  petitioned  the  Pope  to  cause 
this  great  work  to  be  done  and  also  to  bring  it  about  that  the 
Church  of  God  might  also  have  a  correct  Greek  and  Hebrew 
text.* 

*"  Primus  abusus  est:  habere  varias  editiones  S.  Scripturae,  et  illis  velle 
uti  pro  authenticis  in  publicis  lectionibus  et  praedicationibus.  Remedium  est : 
habere  unam  tantam  editionem,  veterem  scilicet  et  Vulgatam,  qua  omnes 
utantur  pro  authentica  in  publicis  lectionibus,  expositionibus  et  praedica- 


THE  AUTHORIZATION   OF  THE  VULGATE.  539 

Several  particular  assemblies  and  three  general  sessions  dis- 
cussed this  proposition,  and  finally,  the  Council  promulgated 
its  famous  decree. 

"  The  same  thrice  holy  Synod,  believing  that  much  benefit 
may  accrue  to  the  Church  of  God,  if  from  among  all  the  Latin 
versions  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  which  are  in  circulation,  an 
authentic  one  be  recognized,  decrees  and  declares  that  the 
old  edition  of  the  Vulgate,  which  has  been  approved  by  the 
Church  by  the  usage  of  so  many  centuries,  shall  be  held 
authentic  in  all  public  readings,  disputations,  and  in  the  public 
exposition  and  preaching  of  Scripture,  and  that  no  man  may 
reject  it  upon  whatever  pretext  *  *  *  And  having  in 
mind  to  establish  also  a  rule  for  printers  *  *  *  The 
Council  decrees  and  establishes  that,  hereafter,  the  Holy 
Scripture,  especially  this  old  Vulgate,  shall  be  most  carefully 
printed."* 

The  decree  of  the  Council  of  Trent  set  in  motion  a  turbu- 
lent movement  especially  in  Spain.  The  power  was  in  the 
hands  of  those  who  defended  the  absolute  infallibility  and 
absolute  sanction  of  the  Vulgate.  These  by  violence  and  the 
power  of  the  law  prevented  any  expression  of  honest  thought 
which  came  short  of  adoration  of  the  Vulgate.  Men  were 
cast  into  prison  for  attempting  to  explain  the  legitimate  sense 
of  the  great  Council's  decree.  Others,  through  fear  of  the  In- 
quisition, either  adopted  the  views  of  the  party  in  power  or 

tionibus,  et  quod  nemo  illam  reiicere  audeat  aut  illi  contradicere  ;  non  detra- 
hendo  tamen  auctoritati  purae  et  verae  interpretationis  Septuaginta  interpre- 
tum,  qua  nonnunquam  usi  sunt  Apostoli,  neque  reiiciendo  alias  editiones, 
quatenus  authenticae  illius  Vulgatae  intelligentiam  iuvant. — Secundus  abustcs 
est  corruptio  codicum  qui  circumferuntur  Vulgatae  huius  editionis.  Reme- 
dium  est,  ut  expurgatis  et  emendatis  codicibus  restituatur  christiano  orbi 
pura  et  sincera  Vulgata  editio  a  mendis  librorum.  qui  circumferuntur.  Id 
autem  munus  erit  Smi.  D.  N.,  quern  8.  Synodus"  humiliter  exorabit,  ut  pro 
ovibus  Christi  Suae  Beatitudini  creditis  hoc  onus  ingentis  fructus  et  glorias 
sui  ipsius  animi  magnitudine  dignum  suscipiat ;  curando  etiam,  ut  unum 
codicem  Graecum  unumque  Hebraeum,  quoad  fieri  potest,  correctum  habeat 
Ecclesia  sancta  Dei." 


*"  Eadem  sacrosancta  Synodus  considerans  non  parum  utilitatis  accedere 
posse  Ecclesiae  Dei,  si  ex  omnibus  latinis  editionibus,  quae  circumferuntur, 
sacrorum  librorum,  quSenam  pro  authentica  habenda  sit  innotescat,  statuit 
et  declarat,  ut  haec  ipsa  vetus  et  Vulgata  editio,  quae  longo  tot  saeculorum 
usu  in  ipsa  Ecclesia  probata  est,  in  publicis  lectionibus,  disputationibus, 
praedicationibus  et  expositionibus,  pro  authentica  habeatur  et  ut  nemo  illam 

reiicere  quovis  praetextu  audeat  vel  praesumat Sed  et  impressoribus 

modum  in  hac  parte,  ut  par  est,  imponere  volens ,  decernit  et  statuit,  ut 

posthac  S.  Scriptura,  potissimum  vero  haec  ipsa  vetus  et  Vulgata  editio  quam 
emendatissime  imprimatur." 


640  THE   AUTHORIZATION   OF   THE  VULGATE. 

kept  a  prudent  silence.  "  I  know,"  says  Bannez,  "  what  I  would 
respond  by  word  of  mouth,  if  asked  by  the  Church ;  mean- 
while, I  maintain  a  prudent  and  religious  silence."  (In  I.  S. 
Thorn.) 

The  position  of  these  extremists  was  that  the  Council  had 
defined  the  absolute  infallibility  of  the  Vulgate,  even  in  the 
least  details ;  that  no  error  of  whatever  nature  was  to  be  found 
in  the  Latin  Vulgate ;  that  since  the  Greek  Schism,  the  Latin 
Church  had  remained  the  sole  depository  of  the  truth,  and 
hence  her  Scriptures  alone  were  authentic,  and  absolutely 
authentic.  Of  this  movement  Richard  Simon  truly  wrote : 
"  There  were  but  very  few  persons  who  accurately  com- 
prehended the  sense  of  the  decree  of  Trent  which  pronounced 
the  Vulgate  authentic  *  *  *  The  greater  number  of  those 
who  agitated  this  question  scarcely  understood  anything  of 
it,  and  they  were  moved  more  by  prejudice  and  passion,  than 
by  sense  and  judgment.  "  Periit  judicium  postquam  res 
transiit  in  affectum."     (Hist.  Crit.  du  V.  T.  H.  14.) 

We  find  an  accurate  and  dispassionate  description  of  these 
causes  and  effects  in  the  Disputation  on  the  Vulgate  of  John 
Mariana.*  What  he  has  written  of  Spain,  could  be  affirmed 
in  less  degree  of  other  countries  in  that  period. 

"Opus  molestum  suscipimus,  multaque  difficultate  impedi- 
tum,  periculosam  aleam,  ac  qua  nescio  an  ulla  disputatio  his 
superioribus  annis  inter  theologos,  in  Hispania  praesertim, 
majori  animorum  ardore  et  motu  agitata  sit,  odioque  partium 
magis  implacabili,  usque  eo,  ut  a  probris  et  contumeliis,  quibus 
se  mutud  foedabant,  ad  tribunalia  ventum  sit ;  atque  quae  pars 
sibi  magis  confidebat,  adversarios  de  Religione  postulatos  gra- 
vissim^  exercuit,  quasi  impios,  superbos,  arrogantes,  qui  divi- 
norum     librorum    auctoritatem,    atque    ejus    interpretationis 

*John  Mariana,  8.  J.  was  bom  in  the  diocese  of  Toledo  in  Spain,  in  1537. 
He  was  endowed  with  great  mental  power  and  uprightness  of  character.  He 
studied  in  the  Complutensian  Academy,  and  in  1554  entered  the  Society  of  the 
Jesuits.  In  1561,  he  came  to  Rome  and  taught  Scripture  for  four  years.  In 
1569,  he  went  to  Paris  and  expounded  the  Summa  of  St.  Thomas,  in  the  great 
Academy  for  five  years.  His  character  was  honest  and  severe,  and  his  in- 
sight into  truth  profound.  Through  failing  health  he  was  forced  to  remit 
some  of  this  study,  and  in  1574  he  returned  to  Spain,  and  in  a  studious  re- 
tirement at  Toledo,  he  lived  to  an  extreme  old  age,  dying  in  1624.  Mariana 
was  a  man  of  unblemished  life,  and  intolerant  of  evil.  He  was  no  time- 
server,  and  attacked  evil  wherever  he  found  it.  Having  attacked  some 
abuses  of  the  State,  in  a  treatise  Be  Monetae  Mutatione,  he  was  judged  guilty 
of  lae8ae  majestatis,  and  in  his  72nd  year  was  imprisoned  in  a  Franciscan 
Monastery.  His  writings  consist  of  numerous  short  treatises  on  various 
subjects,  several  being  on  the  Scriptures. 


THE   AUTHORIZATION   OF  THE  VULGATE.  641 

fidem,  qua  Ecclesia  utitur  passim,  et  quae  vulgata  editio  nun- 
cupatur,  audacter  elevarent,  novis  interpretationibus  prolatis 
invectisque  contra  divinas  leges  et  humanes,  concilii  Tridentini 
decreta  non  it^  pridem  promulgata.  Tenuit  ea  causa  multo- 
rum  animos  suspenses  expectatione,  quern  tandem  exitum 
habitura  esset,  cum  viri  eruditionis  opinione  prasstantes,  h  vin- 
culis  cogerentur  causam  dicere,  baud  levi  salutis  existimationis- 
que  discrimine  :  miseranda  virtutis  conditio,  quando  pro  labo- 
ribus,  quos  susceperat  maximos,  compellebantur  eorum  a  quibus 
defendi  par  fuisset,  odia,  accusationes,  contumelias  tolerare, 
quo  exemplo  multorum  praeclaros  impetus  retardari,  viresque 
debilitari  atque  concidere  necesse  erat.  Omnino  fregit  ea  res 
multorum  animos  alieno  periculo  considerantium,  quantum 
procellae  immineret  libere  affirmantibus  quae  sentirent.  Itaque 
aut  in  aliorum  castra  transibant  frequentes,  aut  tempori  ceden- 
dum  judicabant.  Et  quid  facerent,  cum  frustra  niti  neque 
fatigando  (ut  ille  ait)  aliud  quam  odium  quaerere,  extremae  de- 
mentiaesit?  Plerique  inhaerentes  persuasioni  vulgari,  libenter 
in  opinione  perstabant,  iis  placitis  faventes,  in  quibus  minus 
periculi  esset  baud  magna  veritatis  cura.  Quidam  enim  edi- 
tionem  vulgatam  sugillant,  quasi  multis  vitiis  fcedam,  ad  fontes 
identidem  provocantes,  unde  ad  nos  ii  rivi  manarunt,  ac  con- 
tendentes,  Graecorum  Hebraicorumque  codicum  collatione  cas- 
tigandam  videri,  quoties  ab  illis  discreparit,  linguarum  peritia 
tumidi,  ecclesiasticam  simplicitatem  ludibrio  habentes  ;  quorum 
profecto  audacia  ac  temeritas  pronuntiandi  merito  fraenanda 
est.  E  contrario,  alii  majori  numero  adversariorum  odio  nefas 
putant  vulgatam  editionem  attrectare,  atque  in  impiorum 
numero  habent,  si  quis  vel  levem  vocem  castigare  tentet,  si 
locum  aliquem  aliter  explicare  contendat,  quam  vulgata  inter- 
pretatio  prae  se  ferat  (quos  imitari  profecto  non  debemus) 
pusillo  homines  animo,  oppleti  tenebris,  angust^que  sentientes 
de  Religionis  nostrae  majestate,  qui  dum  opinionum  castella 
pro  fidei  placitis  defendunt,  ipsam  mihi  arcem  prodere  viden- 
tur,  fraternam  charitatem  turpissim^  violantes.  Ergo  extrema 
et  devia  vitata,  quae  in  praecipitia  desinit,  mediam  viam  tenere 
constituimus,  qua  fere  in  omni  disputatione  vitatis  erroribus 
ad  veritatem  pervenitur." 

The  protestants,  taking  the  statements  of  the  Spanish 
theologians  for  the  position  of  the  Church,  loudly  proclaimed 
that  the  Council  had  bound  Scriptural  science  with  chains  of 
iron,  and  condemned  it  to  a  sterile  immobility.* 

*Cfr.  ex.  gr.  Keil  Einl.  p.  579:  "Mit  diesem  Decret  war  zwar  der 
Grundtext  nicht  ausdriicklich  verworf en,  aber  doch  fur  ganz  tlberflussig  er- 


643  THE   AUTHORIZATION   OF   THE   VULGATE, 

The  labors  of  Catholic  theologians  in  establishing  the  real 
sense  of  this  decree,  have  removed  the  cause  for  this  calumny, 
and  it  is  only  the  envelopment  of  a  dense  veil  of  ignorance, 
that  in  our  days  permits  a  repetition  of  this  old  false- 
hood. 

The  Church  was  not  responsible  for  the  course  of  thought 
in  Spain,  The  best  institutions  of  God  and  man  have  been, 
and  will  be  abused.  The  Council  spoke  the  truth,  and  men,  in 
an  inconsiderate  zeal,  misunderstood  its  words.  Some  mis- 
understand them  yet,  but  the  current  of  thought  in  this  regard 
is  better  now  than  then. 

We  place,  therefore,  as  a  thesis  :  That  the  Council  of  Trent, 
in  declaring  the  Vulgate  the  authentic  text  of  Scripture,  did 
not  place  the  excellence  of  the  Vulgate  above  the  original 
texts  of  Scripture,  nor  above  the  old  versions  of  Scripture 
which  had  been  in  use  in  the  Church,  neither  did  it  deny  the 
authenticity  of  these  texts. 

A  sufficient  argument  for  this  position  is  in  the  very  words 
of  the  decree,  and  in  the  nature  of  the  abuse  which  it  was  in- 
tended to  remove.  There  was  no  mention  of  original  texts  or 
versions  other  than  the  Latin.  A  multiplicity  of  Latin  ver- 
sions created  confusion,  and  the  Council  chose  one  Latin 
version,  which  should  be  the  official  text  of  Latin  Scriptures 
for  the  Latin  Church.  The  original  texts  and  old  versions 
have  the  same  merit  as  before,  and  are  as  authentic  as  when 
they  formed  the  Scriptural  basis  of  the  decisions  of  councils, 
prior  to  the  Council  of  Trent.  Cardinal  Pole  and  others  de- 
manded that  a  text  in  Greek  and  Hebrew  might  also  be 
declared  authentic.  Although  this  was  not  done,  we  have 
every  reason  to  believe  that  it  would  have  been  done  if  the 
need  existed.  In  the  Greek  Church  no  great  variety  of  trans- 
lations existed.  The  Greeks  used  their  authentic  text,  which 
had  been  always  sanctioned  by  the  Church's  use,  even  before 
the  Latin  existed.  No  one  denied  its  authenticity,  and  the 
Council  left  it  in  the  peaceful  possession  of  what  it  always  had. 
The  Hebrew  text  was  not  in  use  as  a  practical  text  of  Scrip- 
ture by  any  Christian  Church,  and  there  was  no  need  to  declare 
it  authentic.  It  is  characteristic  of  the  Catholic  Church  not  to 
indulge  in  superfluous  legislation.  Her  decisions  are  few,  and 
framed  to  meet  actual  needs. 

klart  und  die  Uebersetzung  kanonisirt  worden".  De  Wette- Schroder  Einl. 
p.  145:  "Was  man  auch  zur  Milderung  dieses  Decretes  sagen  mag,  immer 
ist  damit  der  exegetischen  Forschung  der  Eingang  in  die  Offentliche  Kirchen- 
lehre  verschlossen".    Alii  alio  modo  eadem  repetunt.    (Comely  op.  cit.) 


THE   AUTHORIZATION   OF   THE  VULGATE.  543 

The  deliberations  of  the  Fathers,  as  related  to  us  by  Palla- 
vicini  (Storia  del  Cone,  di  Trento),  show  plainly  that  the  Fathers 
wished  to  save  the  credit  of  the  original  texts  and  the  old 
versions:  "It  was  the  common  opinion  that  the  Vulgate 
edition  should  be  preferred  to  all  other  (Latin)  editions ;  but 
Pacheco  petitioned  that  these  others  should  be  also  condemned, 
especially  those  made  by  heretics ;  and  he  extended  this  after- 
wards to  the  Septuagint.  Bertram  opposed  this,  maintaining 
that  there  was  always  a  diversity  of  versions  in  use  with  the 
faithful,  which  usage  the  Fathers  had  approved.  And  who 
would  dare,  he  said,  condemn  the  translation  of  the  Septuagint 
which  the  Church  uses  in  her  psalmody?  *  *  *  Let  one 
version  be  approved,  and  the  others  be  neither  approved  nor 
condemned." 

After  the  expression  of  these  views,  Card.  Del  Monte,  one 
of  the  presidents  of  the  Council,  closed  the  disputation  in 
these  words:  "  The  matter  has  been  discussed  and  prepared. 
We  come  now  to  the  form.  The  majority  holds  that  the  Vul- 
gate should  be  received,  but  care  must  be  taken  lest  the  others 
should  be  thought  to  be  tacitly  rejected."  The  "  others  "  are 
evidently  the  original  texts  and  the  old  versions.  Could  any- 
thing be  clearer  ?  The  Fathers  took  thought  lest  their  action 
might  seem  to  be  the  tacit  repudiation  of  the  other  texts. 

This  sense  is  confirmed  by  the  express  declarations  of  some 
of  the  principal  theologians  of  the  Council.  Salmeron,  S.  J., 
who  was  one  of  the  Pope's  theologians  in  the  Council,  declares  : 
"  We  shall  show  that  the  approbation  of  Jerome's  translation 
imported,  in  no  way,  the  rejection  of  the  Greek  or  Hebrew 
texts.  There  was  no  question  of  Greek  or  Hebrew  texts. 
Action  was  only  taken  to  determine  which  was  the  most  excel- 
lent of  the  many  Latin  versions.  The  Council  left  every  man 
free  to  consult  the  Greek  and  Hebrew  texts,  that  he  might 
thereby  emend  its  errors,  or  elucidate  its  sense,  hence,  without 
infringement  on  the  authority  of  the  Council,  where  the  texts 
differ,  we  may  make  use  of  the  text  from  the  Greek  or  Hebrew 
copy,  and  expound  it  as  a  text  of  Scripture.  We  may  use  such 
text,  not  alone  for  moral  instruction,  but  also  use  it  as  a 
Scriptural  basis  for  the  dogmas  of  the  Church." 

The  same  testimony  is  rendered  by  the  Franciscan,  Andrea 
Vega,  whose  wisdom  was  held  in  great  repute  by  the  Fathers 
of  Trent.  In  his  work,  De  Justificatione  XV.  9,  he  thus  ad- 
dresses Calvin :  "  Lest  thou  shouldst  err,  O  Calvin,  regarding 
the  approbation  of  the  Vulgate,  give  ear  to  a  few  things,  which 
I  would  wish  Melancthon  also  might  hear,  who  also,  before 


544  THE  AUTHORIZATION   OF   THE  VULGATE. 

you,  arraigned  the  Fathers  for  this.  The  Synod  did  not 
approve  the  errors  which  linguists  and  those  moderately 
versed  in  Holy  Scripture  find  in  the  Vulgate.  Neither  did 
they  ask  that  it  be  adored  as  though  it  had  descended  from 
Heaven.  The  Fathers  knew  that  the  interpreter  was  not  a 
prophet,  *  *  *  and,  therefore,  the  Synod  did  not  restrain, 
nor  wish  to  restrain,  the  labors  of  linguists,  who  teach  us  that 
certain  things  might  be  better  translated,  and  that  the  Holy 
Ghost  could  signify  many  things  by  one  and  the  same  word, 
and,  at  times,  a  sense  more  apt  than  can  be  obtained  from  the 
Vulgate.  But  considering  the  Vulgate's  age,  and  the  esteem 
in  which  it  was  held  for  centuries  by  Latin  Councils  which 
used  it,  and  in  order  that  the  faithful  might  know — which  is 
most  true — that  no  pernicious  error  can  be  drawn  therefrom,  and 
that  the  faithful  can  read  it  safely  without  danger  to  faith,  and 
to  remove  the  confusion  caused  by  a  multitude  of  translations, 
and  to  modify  the  tendency  to  continually  produce  new  ver- 
sions, the  Council  wisely  enacted  that  we  should  use  the 
Vulgate  in  all  public  readings,  disputations  and  expositions  of 
Scripture.  And  it  declared  it  authentic  in  this  sense,  that  it 
might  be  known  to  all  that  it  was  never  vitiated  by  any  error 
from  which  any  false  doctrinal  or  moral  teaching  might  result ; 
and  for  this  reason  it  decreed  that  no  one  should  reject  it  on 
whatsoever  pretext.  And  that  this  was  the  mind  of  the 
Council,  and  that  it  wished  to  decree  nothing  further  than 
this,  you  may  draw  from  the  words  of  the  Council.  And  lest 
you  should  doubt  of  this,  I  am  able  to  invoke  a  veracious 
witness,  his  Eminence  the  Cardinal  of  Holy  Cross  (Card.  Cer- 
vini,  afterwards  Pope  Marcellus  H.),  who  presided  over  all  the 
sessions.  Both  before  and  after  the  decree,  more  than  once, 
he  testified  to  me  that  the  Fathers  wished  nothing  more  for 
the  Vulgate.  Therefore,  neither  you  nor  anyone  else  is  hin- 
dered by  the  approbation  of  the  Vulgate  from  recurring,  in 
doubt,  to  the  original  texts,  and  one  may  bring  forth  out  of 
them  whatever  he  may  find,  in  order  that  the  sense  of  the 
Latin  may  be  cleared  and  enriched,  and  that  he  may  purge 
the  Vulgate  from  errors,  and  arrive  at  those  things  most  con- 
sonant with  the  sense  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  the  original 
texts."     (Mariana,  1.  c.) 

We  come  in  possession  of  two  truths  in  this  testimony : 
first,  that  Vega  has  the  mind  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  and, 
secondly,  that  the  action  of  the  Fathers  was  just  and  temperate. 
While  Mariana  was  teaching  at  Rome,  question  arose  relating 
to  the  real  sense  of  the  decree  of  Trent.     The  General  of  the 


THE   AUTHORIZATION   OF   THE   VULGATE.  545 

Jesuit  order  at  that  time  was  James  Laynez,  a  man  of  great 
erudition  and  judgment,  who  had  himself  taken  part  in  every 
session  of  the  Council  of  Trent.  He  was  petitioned  to  ex- 
plain to  the  order  the  real  sense  of  the  decree,  and  on  the  tes- 
timony of  Mariana,  his  response  was  substantially  the  same  as 
the  testimony  of  Vega. 

Didacus  de  Andrada  deserves  to  rank  among  the  first 
theologians  of  the  Council.* 

He  was  not  in  the  fourth  session,  in  which  the  Vulgate  was 
approved,  but  as  a  subsequent  member  of  the  Council  he  cer- 
tainly knew  the  mind  of  the  Fathers.  He  approves  the  decla- 
ration of  Vega  and  declares  "  that  we  are  to  so  defend  the  ex- 
cellence and  dignity  of  the  Vulgate,  that  we  in  no  way  obstruct 
the  Hebrew  founts  whence  the  saving  streams  of  truth  have 
flown  forth  to  us.  And  on  the  other  hand  we  are  to  so  vene- 
rate the  old  Hebrew  text  that  we  reject  not  the  authority  and 
majesty  of  the  Vulgate."  (Andrada,  Defens.  Trid.  Fidei  IV. 
p.  257). 

The  excellence  which  the  Fathers  of  Trent  attested  of  the 
Vulgate  is  well  expressed  by  Sixtus  of  Sienna  :  "Although 
errors  are  found  in  the  Vulgate,  it  is  certain  that  neither  in  the 
old  edition  nor  in  the  new  was  anything  ever  found  which  is 
dissonant  from  Catholic  faith,  or  false  or  contrary  to  doctrine 
or  morality,  or  interpolated,  or  changed  to  disagree  with  truth 
or  omitted  to  the  prejudice  of  truth,  or  so  corrupted  that  it 
would  furnish  occasion  of  pernicious  error,  or  occasion  and 
incite  to  heresy,  or  thus  obscurely  and  ambiguously  translated 
that  it  would  obscure  the  mysteries  of  our  faith,  or  in  which 
the  saving  truth  is  not  sufficiently  explained."  (Sixt.  Sen. 
Biblioth.  Sancta.) 

The  opponents  of  the  Catholic  faith  sometimes  allege  as 
the  Catholic  position,  the  opinion  of  Basil  Poncius  (ti626),  the 

*Didacus  de  Paviade  Andrada,  was  born  at  Coimbra  in  Portugal,  in  1528. 
He  entered  the  Church  at  the  age  of  thirty,  was  sent  by  King  Sebastian  of 
Portugal  to  the  Council  of  Trent.  He  was  both  profound  and  eloquent. 
While  at  Trent  he  wrote  the  following  edifying  words:  "While  in  the 
Council  of  Trent,  I  was  wont  to  say  that  even  if  the  authority  of  Councils  were 
not  authorized  and  confirmed  by  Christ,  I  could  easily  give  assent  to  their 
definitions,  being  moved  by  such  an  excellent  method  of  ascertaining  truth." 
While  at  Trent,  he  wrote  An  Explanation  of  the  Orthodox  Faith,  an  excel- 
lent polemic  apologetic  work.  It  was  especially  directed  against  Chemnitz. 
The  heretic  responded,  and  Andrada  wrote  against  him  his  most  celebrated 
work,  A  Defense  of  the  Tridentine  Catholic  Faith.  This  work  has  now  become 
very  rare.  The  work  was  much  esteemed  by  the  Roman  theologians  and  by 
the  Pope  himself.  In  this  work  he  defends  the  Council's  decree  concerning 
the  Vulgate.    He  died  in  1578. 

ir 


546  THE  AUTHORIZATION   OF  THE   VULGATE. 

Chancellor  of  the  University  of  Salamanca.  He  declares  :  "  In 
my  judgment  it  must  be  affirmed  according  to  the  Council's 
decree,  that  not  only  are  all  things  in  the  Vulgate  true,  but 
that  they  are  also  in  strict  conformity  with  the  original  text, 
and  their  sense  faithfully  rendered  by  the  interpreter,  so  that 
he  has,  neither  by  ignorance  nor  negligence,  erred  in  the  least 
thing,  but  that  all  things,  even  the  most  minute,  are,  as  regards 
the  sense,  faithfully  translated.  *  *  *  *  And  this  is  the 
common  opinion  of  our  time."  Migne,  Cursus  S.  S.  I.,  p.  878). 
From  the  fact  that  Poncius  prefaced  this  declaration  by  a 
long  chapter  wherein  he  gives  numerous  examples  of  errone- 
ous translations  of  the  Vulgate,  we  are  led  to  suspect  that  he 
is  here  defending  the  current  opinion  of  Spain  somewhat  after 
the  manner  that  Galileo  defended  the  Ptolemaic  system  in  his 
dialogues.  It  is  a  certain  fact  that  the  fear  of  the  Inquisition 
in  Spain  was  unduly  reactionary  on  theological  opinion  in 
Spain  in  those  days.  At  all  events,  the  common  opinion  of 
Spain  could  not  have  been  what  he  says,  for  we  have  adduced 
the  testimonies  of  her  best  theologians,  which  are  directly 
opposed  to  his  position.  The  only  argument  which  he  adduces 
in  support  of  his  opinion  is,  that  the  Council  declared  the  Vul- 
gate authentic.  Now,  in  the  first  place,  we  deny  that  the 
Council  promulgated  a  dogmatic  definition  that  the  Vulgate 
was  authentic.  It  made  it  of  faith,  that  the  Books  of  the 
Catholic  Canon  with  all  their  parts,  as  they  were  found  in  the 
Vulgate,  were  sacred  and  canonical.  This  is  of  faith,  and  an 
anathema  was  fulminated  against  any  one  who  should  gainsay 
such  truth.  This  certainly  implies  that  the  Vulgate  has  pre- 
served the  substance  of  all  these  books,  so  that  the  element 
which  made  them  sacred  and  inspired  as  they  came  from  the 
writer's  hand  has  persevered  in  them.  This  is  of  faith.  But  the 
decree  concerning  the  use  of  the  Holy  Books  is  disciplinary. 
The  very  words  of  the  decree  warrant  this.  When  a  Council 
binds  men's  faith  by  dogmatic  decree,  the  words  clearly  imply 
such  design.  But  here,  on  the  contrary,  in  the  clearest  terms 
the  Council  maps  out  the  discipline  of  the  Church,  as  regards 
the  reading  of  the  Latin  Scripture.  Of  course  in  this  matter 
dogma  and  discipline  are  correlated.  The  Council,  acting  by 
the  Spirit  of  God,  could  not  and  did  not  authorize  a  substan- 
tially defective  version  of  Scripture.  So  that  this  disciplinary 
decree  rests  on  the  dogmatic  status  of  the  books,  established 
in  the  preceding  decree.  Now  the  Fathers,  in  making  the 
books  authentic  in  the  discipline  of  the  Church,  based  their 
action  on  a  dogmatic  authenticity,  which  they  by  former  decree 


THE  AUTHORIZATION   OF  THE   VULGATE.  547 

had  declared  of  the  books.  The  motive  of  this  declaration  of 
authenticity  was  not  the  strict  conformity  between  the  Vulgate 
and  the  original  text.  The  Fathers  never  examined  such  con- 
formity. The  motion  to  do  so  was  submitted,  but  it  was  lost. 
The  Fathers  based  their  action  on  the  fact  that  the  Church 
had  used  for  well  nigh  a  thousand  years  this  edition  of  the 
Latin  Scriptures.  It  had,  for  all  these  ages,  been  the  great 
scriptural  deposit  of  the  Church,  and  the  Fathers  infallibly 
judged  that  it  was  not  compatible  with  God's  relation  to  the 
Church,  that  he  should  allow  her  to  thus  adopt  a  version  of 
Scripture,  which  did  not  accurately  contain  the  substance  of 
God's  witten  message  to  man.  The  Fathers,  therefore,  under- 
stood by  authenticity  that  the  version  contained  the  substance 
of  that  message. 

This  clear  and  well  warranted  position  at  once  does  away 
with  the  opinion  of  Poncius,  and  it  establishes  the  real  basis 
upon  which  we  may  examine  the  actual  state  of  the  Vulgate. 

The  truth  of  our  position  is  corroborated  by  the  history  of 
the  decree.  When,  during  the  existence  of  the  Council,  the 
decree  was  sent  to  Rome  for  the  Pope's  approbation,  the 
Roman  theologians  protested  against  it,  affirming  that  there 
were  many  errors  in  it  that  could  not  be  attributed  to  the 
copyists,  but  which  were  certainly  due  to  the  translator  him- 
self. In  fact,  such  a  storm  was  raised,  that  there  was  thought 
of  delaying  the  printing  of  the  decree  till  changes  might  be 
made.  When  this  was  made  known  to  the  Papal  legates  in 
the  Council  they  made  answer  that  nothing  was  alleged  by  the 
Roman  theologians  that  the  Council  had  not  maturely  weighed. 
The  Tridentine  Fathers  had  adverted  to  the  errors  of  the  Vul- 
gate, but  they  were  warranted  in  declaring  it  not  substantially 
erroneous.     (Pallavic.  Hist.  Cone.  Trid.  VI.) 

The  dullest  mind  must  see  that  there  was  no  question  of 
absolute  conformity  with  the  original  text,  or  of  immunity  from 
errors  which  affected  not  doctrine  and  morals. 

Our  position  is  strengthened  by  this  final  consideration. 
The  Council  approved  the  then  existing  Latin  Vulgate,  at  the 
same  time  that  it  was  informed  by  the  particular  congregation 
that  all  the  Latin  texts  were  defective,  though  the  Vulgate  was 
the  best  of  them.  And  the  work  of  emending  this  same 
approved  Vulgate  was  taken  up  immediately  by  the  authority 
of  the  Pope  himself.  This  shows  clearly  that  the  Council 
merely  declared  that  the  truths  of  God  had  persevered  in  the 
Latin  version  with  all  its  faults,  and  that  it  was  the  mind  of 
the  Church  that  these  errors  should  be  reduced  to  a  minimum. 


548  THE  AUTHORIZATION   OF   THE  VULGATE. 

And  even  in  the  preface  to  the  Clementine  edition  of  the  Vul. 
gate,  we  are  told  that  certain  things  which  deserved  to  be 
changed  were  left,  to  avoid  the  scandal  of  the  people. 

Even  during  the  authorized  revision  of  the  Vulgate,  Sal- 
meron,  who  was  one  of  the  theologians  of  the  Council,  declared  : 
"  In  the  meantime,  while  the  Vulgate  is  being  revised,  nothing 
prevents  one  from  correcting  the  evident  errors,  either  by- 
means  of  the  Hebrew  and  Greek  text,  or  from  the  various 
readings  of  the  Fathers,  or  by  a  clearer  understanding  of  the 
text  itself,  provided  such  a  one  in  such  a  grave  matter  is  pre- 
pared to  submit  himself  to  the  Church  if  she  should  decide 
otherwise."  (Salmeron,  Proleg.  III.  p.  24.)  This  is  the  golden 
rule  for  all  theologians.  Relying  on  this,  a  theologian  can  freely 
conduct  any  research,  sustained  by  the  thought  that  if  he 
speaks  true  things,  the  Church  will  commend  him,  and  she  will 
safeguard  him  from  error. 

The  opponents  of  our  position  are  of  two  classes.  The 
protestants  insist  on  an  absolute  approbation  of  the  Vulgate, 
that  they  may  thence  move  an  objection  against  the  Church ; 
Some  Catholics  interpret  the  Council's  word  in  a  like  manner 
through  mistaken  zeal  for  orthodoxy.  From  one  or  the  other 
of  these  motives  they  adduce  the  three  following  argu- 
ments: 

I. — Richard  Simon  (Hist.  Crit.  du  V.  Test.  7,  p.  268)  cites  the 
following  decree:  "  On  the  17th  of  January,  1576,  the  General 
Congregation,  through  S.  L.  A.  S.  Montald.  Sixt.  Carafifa, 
declares  that  nothing  can  be  asserted  which  is  not  in  con- 
formity with  the  Vulgate,  even  though  it  be  one  sentence,  or 
a  phrase  or  clause,  or  a  word,  or  a  syllable,  or  even  an  iota." 
Richard  Simon  found  this  declaration  reproduced  by  Leo 
Allatius.  It  appears  to  be  a  plain  forgery.  Its  original  was 
never  found,  though  diligent  search  was  made  in  the  archives 
of  Rome.  Franzelin  declares  that  Father  Perrone  had  in- 
formed him  that  Pius  IX.  had  declared,  by  word  of  mouth, 
that  even  if  the  declaration  did  exist,  nothing  more  was  com- 
manded thereby  than  that  one  should  not  reject  the  Vulgate  in 
matters  of  faith  and  morals.     (Franz.  De  Trad.  p.  563.) 

And  in  any  case,  this  congregation  had  naught  to  do  with 
matters  of  faith.  The  decree  is  either  a  forgery,  or  a  disciplin- 
ary ruling  of  a  council,  and  avails  naught  in  the  present  ques- 
tion. 

2. — They  insist  on  the  former  decree,  which  binds  us  to 
receive  the  books  with  all  their  parts.  Now,  they  say,  every 
word  is  a  part. 


THE  AUTHORIZATION  OF  THE  VULGATE.  549 

The  very  enunciation  of  this  proposition  shows  its  absurdity. 
Every  word  is  a  mathematical  part  of  the  books,  but  it  is  not 
a  moral  part  in  the  sense  that  the  Council  spoke.  They  were 
legislating  against  those  who  rejected  the  deuterocanonical 
parts  of  the  Holy  Books  and  certain  passages  of  the  Gospels, 
and,  in  virtue  of  their  decree,  every  integral  part  of  the  books 
is  sacred  and  canonical.  And  they  meant  not  by  this  to  imply 
that  there  was  an  absolute  conformity  between  these  parts  and 
the  original  inspired  text,  but  that  the  inspired  truths  had 
substantially  endured  in  all  the  parts  of  the  books.  The  Holy 
Ghost  only  guided  them  in  the  truth  of  the  proposition,  and 
in  a  general  supervision  of  the  words  of  their  decree,  so  that 
in  clothing  their  thoughts  with  words,  the  Fathers  spoke  as 
human  agents,  and  their  diction  may  at  times  come  short  of 
absolute  clearness.  The  history  of  the  several  decrees  and  the 
scope  of  their  legislation  aid  us  in  seizing  the  real  sense  of  the 
decrees.  Hence,  we  hold  simply  the  divinity  and  canonicity 
of  the  parts,  ^s  that  term  was  taken  in  the  mind  of  the  Fathers. 
Hence,  the  decree  only  contemplates  the  substantial  integrity 
of  all  the  books.  This  allows  that  even  whole  sentences 
should  be  wanting  from  the  Vulgate  that  are  genuine  in  the 
original,  and  that  there  may  be  whole  sentences  in  the  Vulgate 
which  never  were  in  the  original,  provided  no  error  is  in  them 
contained.  And  there  may  be  sentences  in  the  Vulgate  of 
dogmatic  import,  whose  sense  is  not  that  of  the  origi- 
nal, provided  in  the  same  way  that  nothing  contrary 
to  faith  or  morals  could  result  therefrom.  The  Vul- 
gate reproduces  sufficiently  the  substance  of  God's  written 
message,  and  leaves  a  legitimate  field  to  the  science  of  textual 
criticism. 

Hence,  we  are  not  prevented  by  the  decree  of  the  Vulgate 
from  correcting  the  Latin  of  the  Vulgate  :  "  Omnes  quidem 
resurgemus,  sed  non  omnes  immutabimur,"  (I.  Cor.  XV.  5.), 
in  accordance  with  the  Greek,  to  :  "  Omnes  quidem  non 
dormiemus,  sed  omnes  immutabimur." 

The  text  is  dogmatic,  and  although  the  Vulgate  has  not 
brought  out  Paul's  idea,  it  contains  no  error,  for  all  men  shall 
arise,  and  all  shall  not  put  on  the  incorruption  of  the  elect. 
We  maintain  also  that  the  character  of  the  famous  verse  I.  Jo. 
V.  7.  must  be  treated  independently  of  the  Council's  decree. 
That  it  contains  no  error  we  know  from  the  authority  that 
they  gave  to  the  book.  Whether  it  was  in  the  genuine 
Epistle  of  St.  John  or  not,  must  be  decided  by  means  of  the 
data  of  textual  criticism. 


560        THE  CORRECTION  OF  THE  VULGATE. 

3, — The  third  argument  of  the  adversaries  hardly  deserves 
mention.  They  maintain  that  if  we  are  not  to  reject  the  Vul- 
gate on  any  pretext,  it  results  that  we  can  not  reject  any 
verse  or  word  of  it. 

This  is  mere  cavil.  The  Council's  decree  here  is 
only  disciplinary,  and  relates  to  the  rejection  of  passages 
wherein  is  contained  some  substantial  truths  of  Scrip- 
ture. The  very  conception  of  the  argument  of  the  oppo- 
sition is  an  insult  to  the  intelligence  of  the  Fathers  of 
Trent. 

We  shall  not  speak  of  the  many  errors  recognizable  in  the 
Vulgate.  We  have  built  a  basis,  and  in  our  exegesis  of  the 
Holy  Text  we  shall  judge  the  several  passages  in  accordance 
with  the  data  here  explained. 

Chapter  XXX. 
The  Correction  of  the  Vulgate. 

The  second  abuse  which  the  Council  of  Trent  was  to 
remedy  was  the  corruption  of  the  Latin  codices,  and  the  remedy 
was  that  by  the,  authority  of  the  Pope,  a  correct  edition  of 
the  Vulgate  might  be  submitted  to  the  Council,  and  approved 
by  the  Pope.  The  work  of  emending  the  Vulgate  was 
judged  by  the  Fathers  of  Trent  to  be  so  easy  in  execution 
that  a  corrected  copy  might  be  sent  to  them  while  yet  assem- 
bled in  council.  On  the  24th  of  April,  1546,  Card.  Cervini  had 
written  to  Rome :  "  Staremo  adunque  aspettando  che  voi 
ci  mandiate  presto  una  bella  Bibbia  corretta  et  emendata 
per  poter  stamparla."  (Vercellone,  1.  c.  p.  84.)  But  it  took 
forty  years  to  execute  the  correction  recommended  by  the 
Council  of  Trent. 

In  the  present  work  we  can  only  treat  briefly  of  the  im- 
mense labor  that  was  expended  on  this  emendation.  Un- 
garelli  and  Vercellone  have  ably  written  the  history  of  the 
correction  of  the  Vulgate. 

The  first  movement  to  execute  the  Council's  recommenda- 
tion was  made  by  the  University  of  Louvain.  The  Dominican^ 
John  Henten  (•|'i566)  was  appointed  by  the  faculty  to  revise 
the  Vulgate.  Henten  brought  to  the  task  a  fair  knowledge  of 
Hebrew  and  Greek.  The  work  appeared  at  Louvain  in  1547, 
under  the  title  :  Biblia  Latina  ad  Vetustissima  exemplaria 
recens  castigata.  Henten  collated  about  twenty  codices  in  the 
preparation  of  this  work,  but  none  of  his  codices  go  back  be- 
yond the  tenth  century,  so  that  the  edition  can  not  be  con- 


THE  CORRECTION  OF  THE  VULGATE.         551 

sidered  a  great  critical  work.  The  work  of  Henten  was  very 
favorably  received,  and  many  editions  of  it  were  issued  by  the 
press  at  Lou  vain. 

After  the  death  of  Henten,  the  faculty  of  Louvain  selected 
Lucas  of  Bruges  to  revise  the  work.  He  was  assisted  by 
Molanus,  Hunnaeus,  Reinerius  and  Harlem.  Henten's  text  was 
allowed  to  stand,  but  the  revisers  added  an  Apparatus  Criticus 
from  upwards  of  sixty  codices.  The  edition  was  printed  by 
Plantin.  These  Bibles  enjoyed  great  authority,  and  were 
of  service  to  the  Roman  correctors  of  the  Vulgate. 

The  Council  of  Trent  closed  on  the  fourth  of  December, 
1563.  Immediately  after  its  close,  Pius  IV.  commissioned  four 
Cardinals  to  restore  the  text  of  the  Vulgate  to  its  pristine 
purity.  The  Cardinals  were  Mark  Antony  Colonna,  William 
Sirleti,  Louis  Madrutius,  and  Antony  Caraffa.  Sirleti  was 
considered  the  greatest  linguist  of  his  age.* 

The  first  of  their  labors  was  the  accurate  collation  of  the 
Codex  Paulinus,  which  Sirleti  held  in  high  esteem. 

Under  Pius  V.  the  correction  of  the  Vulgate  was  hindered 
for  the  reason  that  the  learned  men  were  occupied  in  correct- 
ing the  Breviary,  Missal  and  Martyrology.  Pius  V.  was  by  no 
means  negligent  in  the  great  work  of  correcting  the  Vulgate, 
and  for  this  reason  appointed  the  most  learned  men  of  Rome 
to  cooperate  in  the  work.     Principal  among  the  theologians 

*  Sirleti  was  born  in  Calabria  in  Italy  in  1514.  He  studied  at  Naples,  and 
acquired  such  a  command  of  H  ebrew,  Greek  and  Latin  that  they  became  as 
his  mother  tongue.  He  studied  mathematics,  philosophy  and  theology  in 
Greek,  and  was  considered  one  of  the  most  learned  men  of  his  age.  He  was 
held  in  great  esteem  by  Pope  Marcellus  II.  Pius  IV.  thought  so  highly  of 
him  that  he  committed  to  his  care  his  nephew  Charles  Borromeo,  and  at 
Charles'  request  he  created  Sirleti  Cardinal.  After  the  death  of  Pius  IV., 
there  was  thought  of  creating  Sirleti  Pope,  but  the  judgment  prevailed  of 
those  who  thought  that  the  drift  of  his  mind  was  too  much  given  to  letters,  to 
permit  a  strong  practical  administration  in  those  stormy  times.  He  was 
chosen  as  one  of  the  revisers  of  the  Vulgate  by  Pius  IV.  and  continued  on 
that  Congregation  under  his  successor  Pius  V.  He  assisted  in  revising  the 
Missal  and  Breviary  under  Paul  V.  and  was  also  at  the  head  of  the  Vatican 
Library.  He  enriched  the  Library  by  many  valuable  works  in  the  Oriental, 
Greek,  and  Latin  languages.  He  was  beneficent  in  character,  and  greatly 
assisted  needy  students.  He  died  in  1583.  His  contemporaries,  without 
reserve,  place  him  as  the  first  scriptural  scholar  of  his  age.  One  of  them 
declared  ' '  that  the  dreams  of  Sirleti  were  more  learned  than  the  waking 
creations  of  many  learned  men ;  for  often  in  sleep  he  was  heard  to  discourse 
in  Greek  and  Latin  of  some  ditficult  theme."  (Eggs,  Purpura  Docta,  I.  5,  11). 
Latinus  Latinius  declared  in  a  letter  to  Masius  (Op.  Latinii  Tom.  11.  p.  134) 
that  from  personal  knowledge  he  judged  Sirleti  alone  to  equal  all  the  others 
who  were  associated  with  him  in  correcting  the  Vulgate.  This  remarkable 
man  has  left  nothing  of  importance  in  writing. 


662        THE  CORRECTION  OF  THE  VULGATE. 

were  Antonio  Agellius  and  Emmanuel  Sa.  The  commission 
proceeded  slowly,  and  with  great  labor.  From  the  28th  of 
April  to  the  7th  of  December  of  the  year  1569,  they  spent  in 
revising  Genesis  and  Exodus.  The  theologians  had  held 
twenty-six  general  conferences  before  the  Cardinals  to  confer 
on  this  portion  of  their  labors.  The  fundamental  error  of  the 
time  was  to  consider  the  work  easy,  and  to  be  performed 
quickly.  Without  doubt  those  men  had  selected  the  right 
method,  and  if  vexation  over  the  delay  had  not  obstructed 
their  labors,  we  might  have  had  a  much  better  text. 

Card.  Buoncompagno  succeeded  Pius  V.  in  1572,  and  took 
the  name  of  Gregory  XIII.  He  was  one  of  the  first  canonists 
of  his  age,  and  as  such  had  sat  in  the  Council  of  Trent.  He 
brought  to  completion  the  correction  of  the  liturgical  books, 
and  then  turned  his  attention  to  the  correction  of  the  Calen- 
dar and  the  revision  of  the  Corpus  Juris.  His  claim  to  immor- 
tality in  history  rests  mainly  on  the  correction  of  the  Calendar, 
a  work  much  needed  and  well  wrought. 

At  this  juncture  a  remarkable  man  came  into  important 
relations  in  the  Church.     This  was  Card.  Peretti.* 

He  moved  Gregory  XIII.  to  add  to  the  body  commissioned 
to  revise  the  Vulgate,  certain  consulting  theologians,  chief 
among  whom  were  Robert  Bellarmine,  Peter  Morini,  and 
Flaminius  Nobilius.     The  design  of  Peretti  was  to  correct  first 

*Felix  Peretti  was  born  in  1521,  in  a  small  village  of  the  Marches  of 
Ancona.  His  father  was  a  vine-dresser,  and  being  unable  to  rear  the  boy, 
gave  him  to  a  farmer,  who  set  him  to  herd  sheep  and  swine.  While  thiis 
engaged,  a  Franciscan  monk  passed  that  way,  who  was  at  a  loss  to  find  the 
road  to  Ascoli.  Felix  directed  him  and  accompanied  him  to  the  convent. 
The  Franciscans,  recognizing  the  natural  endowments  of  the  youth,  instructed 
him.  He  entered  the  Order,  and  became  an  able  philosopher  and  theologian. 
He  was  ordained  priest  in  1545,  and  soon  after,  was  created  doctor  and 
appointed  professor  at  Sienna.  It  was  at  this  juncture  that  he  took  the  name 
of  Montaltus,  by  which  he  is  sometimes  known.  He  became  famous  as  a 
preacher,  was  made  consulter  of  the  Inquisition  and  procurator -general  of 
his  Order.  Pius  V.  made  him  general  of  his  Order  and  then  Cardinal.  We 
are  informed  by  Gregory  Leti  that  during  the  pontificate  of  Gregory  XIII. 
Peretti  aspired  to  the  Papal  throne,  and  that  to  promote  his  design,  he  with- 
drew somewhat  from  public  affairs,  affected  feeble  health,  and  seemed  intent 
only  on  preparing  for  death.  On  the  death  of  Gregory  XIII.  there  was  a 
deadlock  in  the  conclave,  and  they  finally  agreed  on  Card.  Peretti  and 
elected  him  Pope  on  the  24th  of  April,  1585.     He  took  the  name  of  Sixtus  V. 

As  soon  as  he  was  assured  of  his  election,  he  threw  away  his  cane,  stood 
erect,  and  intoned  the  Te  Deum  in  a  voice  that  shook  the  chapel  walls. 
Whether  we  accept  this  account  or  not,  it  is  certainly  true  that  often,  when 
men  are  called  to  elect  a  man  for  an  oflSce  which  they  themselves  ambition, 
in  their  inability  to  place  themselves  in  the  coveted  place,  they  will  be  dis- 
posed to  favor  the  candidacy  of  one  whose  condition  of  health  and  period  of 


THE  CORRECTION   OF  THE  VULGATE.  553 

the  Septuagint,  which  was  then  to  be  used  to  revise  the  Vul- 
gate. When  Peretti  succeeded  Gregory  XIII.,  he  prosecuted 
this  design  with  his  usual  energy,  and  in  the  second  year  of  his 
pontificate  (Oct.  8,  1856),  published  the  best  edition  of  the 
Septuagint  that  we  have  ever  received.  See  page  490.  With 
equal  energy,  he  next  took  up  the  revision  of  the  Vulgate. 
He  placed  at  the  disposition  of  the  commission  the  best 
codices  that  he  could  obtain.  He  even  took  active  part  in  the 
collation  of  these  codices.  The  number  of  the  members  of  the 
commission  was  increased.  Antonio  Agellius  (f  1608)  who 
was  very  capable  in  Hebrew  and  Greek,  compared  dubious 
readings  with  the  Greek  and  Hebrew  texts.  Card.  Caraffa 
presided  over  the  whole  work,  and  at  the  end  of  two  years  of 
assiduous  labor,  the  completed  correction  was  delivered  to  the 
Pope.  The  scope  of  the  revisers  was  simply  to  restore  the 
text  of  Jerome  to  its  pristine  state.  They  did  not  contem- 
plate the  removal  of  the  errors  which  Jerome  committed.  At 
times,  however,  where  the  reading  of  Jerome  could  not  be 
determined  with  certainty,  they  employed  the  original  text 
to  establish  the  genuine  sense  of  Scripture.  The  method 
of  these  men,  their  reputation  for  learning  and  the  care  and 
labor  that  they  bestowed  on  the  Vulgate,  warrant  that  the 
result  of  their  labors  was  excellent.     But  the  action  of  the 

life  foreshow  a  short  incumbency,  for  the  reason  that  they  may  thus  again  be 
allowed  to  contend  for  the  coveted  place.  It  is  certain  that  such  causes  have 
been  active  in  the  election  of  more  than  one  Pope. 

The  election  of  Sixtus  V.  was  providential.  He  was  a  man  of  great 
energy  of  character,  and  a  man  of  action.  The  land  was  a  prey  to  libertinage, 
brigandage,  and  all  sorts  of  violence.  Sixtus  met  this  state  of  things  by  a 
terrible  rigor.  He  caused  to  be  erected  special  gallows  to  punish  immediately 
those  guilty  of  licentiousness  during  the  carnival.  Before  his  time  a  maiden 
dared  not  walk  the  streets  without  fear  of  violence.  The  nobles  had  been 
unrestrained  in  their  treatment  of  the  daughters  of  the  plebeians.  Sixtus 
made  adultery  punishable  by  death.  Even  a  husband  who  refused  to  de- 
nounce an  adulterous  wife  was  condemned  to  death.  Brigands  and  robbers 
of  every  sort  were  hunted  down  and  hanged.  By  these  measures,  Sixtus 
restored  the  sanctity  of  law  among  a  people  who  can  only  be  held  to  law  by 
fear.  He  erected  the  famous  obelisk  in  the  Piazza  of  St.  Peter's,  enlarged 
and  embellished  the  Vatican  Palace,  enriched  the  Vatican  Library,  reorgan- 
ized the  Congregation  of  the  Holy  Office  and  the  Congregation  of  Rites,  and 
decreed  that  the  number  of  Cardinals  shoulc  not  exceed  seventy.  This 
number  has  been  observed  by  his  successors.  Excess  of  labor  wore  him  out, 
and  he  died  in  1590,  after  a  pontificate  of  five  years.  The  Roman  people 
broke  his  statue  in  pieces  in  testimony  of  their  hatred  of  his  severity,  but 
this  very  fact  entitles  him  to  our  greater  commendation.  By  his  very  rigor, 
he  was  able  to  disband  the  soldiers,  and  uphold  the  law  by  the  force  of  his 
own  character.  All  things  considered,  Sixtus  V.  must  be  considered  as  a 
credit  to  the  Papacy. 


664         THE  CORRECTION  OF  THE  VULGATE. 

Pope  entered  to  frustrate,  in  large  part,  this  result.  The  com- 
mission had  made  much  use  of  the  Codex  Amiatinus  which  the 
Pope  held  in  little  esteem.  Moreover,  the  corrected  text 
differed  much  from  the  Bibles  of  Louvain  which  Sixtus  prized. 
He,  therefore,  read  carefully  their  work,  approved  what  he 
pleased  of  it,  and  rejected  a  great  part.  Card.  Caraffa  pro- 
tested, but  in  vain. 

Sixtus,  to  his  energy  of  character,  added  a  certain  stub- 
born, excessive  trust,  in  his  own  judgment.  His  action  here 
is  inexcusable,  and  rendered  void  the  conscientious  labors  of 
the  best  talent  of  Italy.  After  thus  inducing  these  changes, 
Sixtus  committed  the  printing  of  the  work  to  Aldo  Manuzio, 
who  had  succeeded  his  father  as  printer  at  the  Vatican  press. 
The  Augustinian  Angelo  Bocca  and  Francis  Toleti,  S.  J.,  were 
appointed  to  see  the  work  through  the  press.  The  Pope  him- 
self read  every  page  as  it  came  from  the  press.  The  work  ap- 
peared in  a  magnificent  volume  in  1590. 

The  text  is  preceded  by  the  famous  Bull,  "  Aeternus  ille  ", 
of  Sixtus  V.  The  text  of  the  Bull  is  given  in  full  in  Comely, 
op.  cit.,  p.  465,  et  seqq. 

Protestant's  allege  the  bull  as  an  evidence  of  the  Pope's 
fallibility  in  doctrine.  Wherefore,  we  shall  examine  some  of 
its  salient  points.  The  bull  bears  the  date  of  the  Kalends  of 
March  1589,  and,  as  Sixtus  testified  to  the  Venetian  Legate 
on  the  third  of  the  following  July  that  the  Book  of  Wisdom 
was  then  in  press,  and  as  numerous  typographical  errors  were 
corrected  before  the  edition  was  given  to  the  public,  we  must 
infer  that  Sixtus  wrote  the  bull  in  view  of  a  future  fact,  and  it  is 
probable  that  the  bull  never  was  promulgated.  But  our  de- 
fense of  papal  infallibility  rests  not  on  this  data.  The  bull 
contains  doctrinal  import  and  disciplinary  measures.  These 
latter  were  unwise,  and  were  prudently  set  aside  by  his  successor. 
But  in  matters  doctrinal,  no  man  can  find  aught  that  is  repug- 
nant to  Catholic  faith  in  the  bull.  The  constitution  opens 
with  a  prolix  description  of  the  origin,  and  history  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures.  The  Pope  speaks  of  the  various  readings  of  the  cod- 
ices and  their  causes.  And  then  declares  that  in  these  many 
various  readings  nothing  was  ever  found  which  could  injure 
faith  or  morals.  This  position  no  man  can  shake.  The 
pontiff  commends  the  Council  of  Trent  for  its  remedial  measure, 
and  regrets  that  its  execution  has  been  deferred.  He  next 
speaks  of  the  active  part  which  he  had  taken  in  the  revision,  in 
which  he  states  that  he  had  expended  many  hours  every  day 
in  judging  of  the  labors  of  others,  and  selecting  what  seemed 


THE  CORRECTION  OF  THE  VULGATE.         555 

good.  He  had  founded  a  fine  printing  press  for  the  express 
work  of  printing  these  editions,  and  he  had  read  the  press- 
proofs  of  the  work.  He  declares,  moreover,  that  it  was  not  his 
mind  to  edit  a  new  translation  of  the  Vulgate,  "  sed  ut  Vulgata 
Vetus  ex  Tridentinae  Synodi  praescripto  emendatissima, 
pristinaeque  suae  puritati,  qualis  primum  ab  ipsius  interpretis 
manu  styloque  prodierat,  quoad  fieri  potest,  restituta  imprim- 
atur." He  declares  at  times  that,  where  the  Latin  data  was 
hopelessly  defective,  the  sense  had  been  sought  from  the 
Hebrew  and  Greek  text.  Sixtus  testifies  of  his  great  venera- 
tion for  Jerome,  and  insists  repeatedly  that  care  was  taken  not 
to  change  that  which  had  grown  venerable  in  the  Church.  He 
also  declares  that  he  had  cut  off  the  Third  and  Fourth  book 
of  Ezra,  the  Third  of  Maccabees  and  the  prayer  of  Manasseh, 
and  certain  other  passages  which  were  interpolated  in  the 
Vulgate. 

At  length  the  pontiff  comes  to  this  point :  "  With  certain 
knowledge,  and  in  plenitude  of  our  apostolic  authority,  we 
establish  and  declare  that  the  Latin  Vulgate  which  was 
received  by  the  Council  of  Trent  is  without  doubt  or  contro- 
versy this  very  edition  which  we  have  now  corrected  as  best 
we  were  able  and  caused  to  be  printed  in  the  Vatican  press, 
and  we  publish  it  to  be  read  in  the  universal  Christian  world, 
and  in  all  the  Christian  churches,  declaring  that  this  edition, 
which  was  sanctioned  by  the  use  of  the  Christian  people,  by 
the  consensus  of  the  holy  Fathers,  by  the  decree  of  Trent,  and 
which  is  now  approved  by  the  authority  of  the  apostolic  power 
given  us  by  the  Lord,  is  to  be  received  as  true,  lawful,  authentic, 
and  undoubted,  in  all  public  and  private  disputations,  and  the 
public  reading,  preaching,  and  exposition  of  Scripture.  And 
we  strictly  forbid  for  all  future  times  any  one  to  print  the  text 
of  this  edition  of  the  Vulgate  without  the  express  permission 
of  the  Holy  See  ;  and  let  no  one  even  privately  make  for  him- 
self another  edition ;  and  let  no  one  during  the  next  ten  years 
dare  to  print  this  our  corrected  Vulgate  elsewhere  than  in  the 
Vatican  press.  And  after  the  lapse  of  ten  years,  we  order  that 
no  one  shall  dare  print  the  Holy  Scriptures  except  in  accord- 
ance with  the  exemplar  from  the  Vatican  press,  and  having 
the  authorization  of  the  Inquisitor,  or,  if  there  be  no  deputy  of 
the  inquisition  in  the  place,  of  the  ordinary  of  the  place,  and 
we  order  that  there  shall  be  no  change  in  anything." 

The  pontiff  then  forbids  all  marginal  readings  in  the  text, 
orders  that  all  liturgical  books  be  corrected  in  accordance  with 
his  edition,  and  declares  to  be  without  authority  all  other  Latin 


666        THE  CORRECTION  OF  THE  VULGATE. 

texts.  The  constitution  closes  with  the  usual  formula  of 
promulgation,  with  an  excommunication  upon  those  who 
should  dare  infringe  the  bull,  and  is  signed :  "  Rome,  at  S. 
Maria  Maggiore,  A.  D.  1589,  the  Kalends  of  March,  the  fifth 
year  of  our  pontificate." 

The  only  affirmation  that  is  here  contained  is  that  his 
edition  was  the  Vulgate  of  Trent.  This  is  true,  and  could 
have  been  made  of  faith.  The  Vulgate,  even  before  he  or  any 
other  man  corrected  a  word  of  it,  was  the  Vulgate  of  Trent, 
and  contained  the  substantial  word  of  God.  God  had  not 
permitted  the  Latin  Scripture  to  become  substantially  corrupt. 
He  did  not  permit  them  to  become  thus  corrupt  in  the  Sixtine 
edition.  While  we  deny  that  the  bull  was  ever  promulgated, 
and  though  it  finds  no  place  in  the  Roman  Bullariutn,  there  is 
no  doctrinal  falsehood  in  it. 

As  to  its  disciplinary  enactment,  all  must  agree  that  it  was 
unwise  and  excessive.  It  was  never  imposed  on  the  faithful, 
and  the  Providence  of  God  brought  it  about  that  the  Church 
suffered  not  from  this  Pope's  unwise  use  of  power.  In  fact,  it 
seems  that  Pope  Sixtus  V.  was  unduly  prone  to  exercise  his 
power. 

Sixtus'  work  was  done  when  order  had  been  restored,  and 
the  law  upheld  in  Italy.  In  times  of  peace  he  was  not  equally 
valuable  to  the  Church.  He  died  before  his  edition  of  the 
Vulgate  was  given  to  the  public.  After  his  death,  by  universal 
consent,  it  was  judged  necessary  to  correct  the  edition.  The 
typographical  part  was  poorly  done.  Waxed  paper  was  pasted 
over  certain  errors,  and  in  other  places  cancelations  in  ink  were 
apparent. 

The  immediate  successor  of  Sixtus  V.,  Urban  VII.,  died 
thirteen  days  after  his  election.  Gregory  XIV.  succeeded  in 
1590,  and  immediately  consulted  with  the  Congregation  as  to 
what  action  was  to  be  taken  on  the  Vulgate  of  Sixtus.  The 
tide  of  feeling  ran  high  against  Sixtus  V.,  and  the  members  of 
the  Congregation  moved  that  the  work  of  Sixtus  be  proscribed. 
Bellarmine  more  wisely  moved  that  the  edition  be  corrected 
with  all  possible  haste  and  then  published,  that  the  credit  of 
the  defunct  Pope  might  be  saved,  and  the  scandal  of  the 
people  averted. 

The  counsel  of  Bellarmine  prevailed  and  Gregory  at  once 
instituted  a  congregation  of  seven  cardinals  and  twelve  theo- 
logians to  revise  the  sixtine  edition.  Card.  Mark  Antony 
Colonna  presided  over  all  the  deliberations  of  the  congrega- 


THE  CORRECTION  OF  THE  VULGATE.        557 

tion ;  and  principal  among  the  theologians  were  Agellius, 
Bellarmine,  Morini,  Toleti,  and  Rocca.  The  Pope  was  con- 
sulted on  the  most  difficult  passages. 

The  congregation  proposed  as  a  leading  canon  in  the  work 
not  to  make  a  change  from  the  accepted  reading  unless  neces- 
sity required  it. 

The  congregation  spent  forty  days  in  the  examination  of 
Genesis. 

It  became  evident  that,  in  this  mode  of  procedure,  years 
would  be  required  for  the  revision. 

Moved  by  this  consideration  Pope  Gregory  dissolved  the 
congregation,  and  organized  a  new  body.  He  placed  at  the 
head  of  the  new  organization  two  cardinals,  Antony  Caraffa, 
Sr.,  and  William  Allen.* 

Under  the  direction  of  these  two  Cardinals,  eight  theolo- 
gians worked,  principal  among  whom  were  Bellarmine,  Morini, 
Agellius,  Rocca,  and  Valverde.  They  withdrew  to  the  palace 
of  the  Colonna  at  Zagarolo,  and,  according  to  the  inscription 
placed  in  the  palace  in  1723,  they  finished  their  labors  in  nine- 
teen days.  The  great  work  had  been  done  by  those  who  had 
labored  before  them  in  the  correction,  and  they  had  only  to 
select  the  best  of  what  others  had  collected.  In  October  of 
1 591  they  offered  the  corrected  copy  to  Gregory  XIV.  In  the 
same  month  Gregory  XIV.  died.  Innocent  X.,  who  succeeded 
him,  died  on  the  30th  of  the  following  December. 

In  January  of  1592,  Clement  VIII.  was  created  Pope,  and 
his  first  care  was  to  complete  the  correction  of  the  Vulgate. 
He  appointed  the  two  Cardinals,  Frederick  Borromeo  and 
Augustus  Valerius,  to  supervise  the  work,  and  commissioned 
Toleti,  S.  J.,  to  cooperate  with  them.  The  Cardinals  confided 
the  whole  work  to  Toleti.  This  eminent  man  wrote  upon  the 
wide  margins  of  the  Sixtine  edition,  the  corrections  which  had 
been  recommended  by  the  Gregorian  Congregation,  and  also, 
in  certain  places,  recommended  certain  readings  which  he  had 

*William  Allen  was  born  at  Rossal  in  England  in  1532.  He  completed  a 
brilliant  course  of  study  at  Oxford,  but  was  exiled  from  England  for  ad  - 
herence  to  the  Catholic  faith.  He  fled  to  Louvain.  and  thence  to  Malines, 
where  he  was  ordained  priest  in  1565.  After  a  journey  to  Rome  in  1567,  he 
fixed  his  abode  at  Douay,  where  he  founded  the  English  Catholic  College  to 
prepare  priests  for  England.  He  was  ever  intent  in  aiding  his  exiled  com- 
patriots, and  in  laboring  for  the  conversion  of  England.  His  biographer, 
Fitzherbert,  declares  of  him :     ' '  Homo  natus  ad  Angliae  salutem. " 

He  executed  the  famous  Catholic  translation  of  Scriptures,  called  the 
Douay  version.  He  was  created  Cardinal  in  1587  by  Sixtus  V.,  and  appointed 
a  member  of  the  Sixtine  Congregation  to  revise  the  Vulgate.  He  died  at 
Rome  in  1594. 


558  THE  COJIRECTION   OF  THE  VULGATE. 

approved  by  collation  of  the  best  MSS.  On  the  28th  of 
August,  1592,  Toleti's  work  was  submitted  to  the  Cardinals 
and  approved  by  them,  and  Rocca  was  commissioned  to  write 
them  on  the  margin  of  a  copy  of  the  Sixtine  edition  for  the 
printer. 

At  this  point  Valverde  interposed  an  objection.  Being  an 
able  Hebraist,  he  bore  it  ill  that  the  Vulgate  had  not  in  all 
places  been  rendered  conformable  to  the  Massoretic  text.  He 
presented  to  the  Pope  a  libellus,  wherein  were  over  two 
hundred  passages  in  which  the  Vulgate  differed  from  the 
Hebrew.  The  Pope  took  counsel,  and  after  mature  delibera- 
tion, forbade  Valverde  ever,  in  word  or  writing,  to  treat 
of  this  difference.  Such  treatment  of  a  man  seems  to  us  harsh, 
and  subversive  of  human  liberty,  but  we  must  consider  the 
nature  of  the  fact  and  the  circumstances.  The  proposition  of 
Valverde  was  against  the  first  design  in  all  the  corrections, 
which  was  not  to  re-translate  the  Scriptures  from  the  Hebrew, 
but  to  restore  the  pristine  text  of  the  Vulgate.  The  diver- 
gencies were  not  in  matters  of  faith  or  morals ;  in  many  cases 
the  Massoretic  text  has  no  more  claim  to  purity  than  the 
Vulgate ;  the  people  were  waiting  for  the  Bible,  and  prone  to 
ugly  rumors  regarding  the  delay  ;  to  put  into  execution  Val- 
verde's  proposition,  would  have  necessitated  a  long  period  of 
toil,  for  they  could  not  adopt  his  readings  on  his  sole  authority ; 
scholars  can  always  collate  the  two  texts,  so  that  no  real 
necessity  existed  for  the  change  ;  and  finally,  had  Valverde 
been  allowed  to  speak  his  views  to  the  public,  the  protestants 
would  have  raised  a  great  cry  against  the  Latin  text  of  the 
Catholic  Church,  and  faith  would  have  suffered  thereby. 
There  were  but  two  ways,  either  to  do  what  he  advised,  or 
restrain  him  from  speaking.  The  former  was  not  possible  at 
that  time ;  the  latter  was  wisely  adopted. 

If  it  be  not  presumption,  I  express  here  a  regret,  that  the 
authorities  of  the  Church  did  not  at  that  time,  by  the  labors 
of  those  great  linguists  and  theologians,  make  a  translation  of 
the  entire  Scriptures,  as  far  as  possible,  from  the  original  texts, 
employing  in  the  work  the  Vulgate  only  for  reference,  and  in- 
asmuch as  it  helped  to  the  full  meaning  of  the  original  text. 
They  may  have  thought  that  such  a  move  would  be  interpreted 
to  signify  that  the  text  of  the  Latin  Scriptures  had  been  un- 
reliable, but  a  comparison  of  the  two  texts  would  have  con- 
vinced all  that  the  substantial  truths  of  God's  covenants  were 
safely  contained  in  the  Vulgate,  and  this  would  have  repelled 
the  false  accusation. 


MODERN    ENGLISH   VERSIONS   OF   SCRIPTURE.  559 

Clement  VII I.  appointed  Toleti  to  supervise  the  printing 
of  the  Vulgate  ;  and  Angelo  Rocca  to  correct  the  proofs.  The 
edition  was  pushed  rapidly  forward,  and  completed  before  the 
end  of  1592.  And  thus,  at  last,  the  design  formulated  in  1546 
by  the  Fathers  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  and  approved  by  the 
Pope,  was  put  in  effect,  and  the  Church  received  an  authentic 
version  of  Scripture. 

The  edition  differed  not  in  external  form  from  the  Sixtine 
edition.  It  was  printed  by  Aldo  Manuzio,  who  had  printed 
the  edition  of  Sixtus.  Moreover,  it  bore  at  first  the  name  of 
Sixtus  in  its  title  :  "  Biblia  Sacra  Vulgatae  Editionis  Sixti  V. 
Pont.  Max.  jussu  recognita  atque  edita."  It  was  not  till  1641 
that  the  name  of  Clement  VIII.  was  placed  in  the  title  page, 
and  the  honor  of  the  work  was  given  to  whom  it  by  right  be- 
longed. Since  that  time  it  is  called  the  Clementine  edition. 
It  differs  from  the  Sixtine  edition  in  over  three  thousand 
texts. 

The  preface  of  the  Clementine  edition,  which  is  supposed 
to  have  been  written  by  Bellarmine  and  Toleti,  candidly  ad- 
mits that  certain  things  "  quae  mutanda  videbantur  "  were  left 
unchanged  to  avoid  the  scandal  of  the  people,  and  because 
there  was  some  doubt  whether  the  original  texts  had  remained 
in  such  passages  free  from  corruption. 

The  edition,  therefore,  does  not  lay  claim  to  absolute  per- 
fection, but  it  is,  without  doubt,  the  best  translation  of  the 
Scriptures  in  any  language.  Yet,  we  still  think  that  the 
Church  with  her  immense  resources,  human  and  divine,  could 
prepare  a  better  edition,  and  we  look  forward  to  future  times 
to  add  this  glory  to  the  works  of  the  Catholic  Church. 

The  difference  between  the  Sixtine  and  Clementine  editions 
was  made  the  subject  of  a  fierce  attack  on  papal  infallibility 
by  Thomas  James,  in  a  work  entitled  "  Bellum  Papale,"  Lon- 
don, 1600.  He  has  been  ably  refuted  by  Henry  Bukentop,  in 
the  excellent  work  "  *l1^D  '^)^f  Lux  de  Luce,"  Brussels, 
1710.  The  line  of  defense  is  the  same  as  we  have  pointed  out 
in  treating  of  Pope  Sixtus'  work. 

Chapter  XXXI. 
Modern  English  Versions  of  Scripture. 

The  calumny  is  often  put  upon  the  Church  that  she  with- 
held the  Scriptures  from  the  people. 

We  live  in  an  age  of  universal  shallow  enlightenment. 
Nothing  is  more  subversive  of  faith  than  this  smattering  of 


«'>60  MODERN  .ENGLISH   VERSIONS   OF   SCRIPTURE. 

knowledge.  The  general  tendency  of  varied  superficial  know- 
ledge is  to  make  people  irreligious.  Broad,  deep,  true 
knowledge  would  lead  to  God,  but  the  great  number  never 
attain  this.  The  knowledge  obtained  by  many  is  just  sufficient 
to  destroy  reverence,  generate  intellectual  pride,  and  make  the 
man  intolerant  of  all  restraint.  Even  the  man  of  the  humblest 
intellectual  attainments  imbibes  the  superficial  philosophy  of 
those  with  whom  he  comes  in  contact,  and  loses  some  of  his 
faith  and  his  reverence. 

I  am  speaking  especially  of  America,  and  I  endorse  heartily 
the  following  description  of  American  thought  by  Wendell 
Phillips :  "  The  most  objectionable  feature  of  our  national 
character  is  self-conceit, — an  undue  appreciation  of  ourselves, 
an  exaggerated  estimate  of  our  achievements,  of  our  inven. 
tions,  of  our  contributions  to  popular  comfort,  and  of  our 
place,  in  fact,  in  the  great  procession  of  the  ages.  We  seem 
to  imagine  that,  whether  knowledge  will  die  with  us  or  not, 
it  certainly  began  with  us.  We  have  a  pitying  estimate,  a 
tender  compassion,  for  the  narrowness,  ignorance  and  darkness 
of  bygone  ages.  We  seem  to  ourselves  not  only  to  monopolize, 
but  to  have  begun  the  era  of  light.  In  other  words,  we  are  all 
running  over  with  a  fourth-day-of-July  spirit  of  self-content. 
I  am  often  reminded  of  the  German,  whom  the  English  poet, 
Coleridge,  met  at  Frankfort.  He  always  took  off  his  hat  with 
profound  respect  when  he  ventured  to  speak  of  himself.  It 
seems  to  me,  the  American  people  might  be  painted  in  the 
chronic  attitude  of  taking  off  its  hat  to  itself." 

The  only  thing  that  is  valuable  in  human  life  is  the  service 
that  comes  to  the  Creator  out  of  it,  and  certainly  the  so-called 
spread  of  enlightenment  has  not  augmented  this.  It  is  not  to 
be  said  that  religion  thrives  in  ignorance,  and  hates  the  light, 
but  she  hates  that  false  light  which  travesties  her  real  nature. 
It  would  be  better  that  a  people  should  be  ignorant  of  this 
shoddy  education,  and  well  taught  the  truths  of  God  and  his 
law,  where  full,  deep  knowledge  is  unattainable.  "  Shallow 
draughts  of  knowledge  intoxicate  the  brain,  but  drinking 
largely  sobers  us  again." 

Now  the  Church,  with  a  wisdom  greater  than  man's,  wisely 
regulated  the  reading  of  the  Bible  by  the  masses.  Many 
things  in  the  Bible  are  hard  to  understand,  and  the  man  of 
little  knowledge  would  often  wrest  these  to  his  own  destruc- 
tion. Large  use  was  always  made  in  the  Catholic  Church  of 
the  Scriptures  of  God.  They  were  explained  to  the  people, 
and  those  portions  which  they  could  understand,  mainly  the 


THE    ANGLO-SAXON    VERSIONS.  561 

Gospels  and  the  Psalms,  were  put  into  their  hands,  but  the 
Church  never  misunderstood  Christ,  that  she  should  convert 
the  world  by  placing  the  text  of  the  Bible  in  the  vulgar  tongue 
in  the  hands  of  the  people.  The  Church  has  yielded  to  the 
exigencies  of  the  times  to  prevent  greater  evil,  and  has  made 
more  concessions  in  this  regard  than  is  good  for  man.  I 
believe  to-day  that  the  indiscriminate  reading  of  the  Bible  in 
the  vernacular  is  not  for  the  best  interests  of  man.  Hence  we 
see  that  in  England  some  parts  of  Scripture,  which  were 
adapted  to  the  people's  use,  were  translated  centuries  before 
the  whole  Bible  was  translated. 

It  is  very  doubtful  whether  the  entire  Scriptures  have  ever 
been  translated  into  Anglo-Saxon.  We  have  no  traditionary 
account  of  a  complete  version,  and  all  the  biblical  MSS.  in 
Anglo-Saxon  now  in  existence  contain  but  select  portions  of 
the  sacred  volume.  The  poems  on  sacred  subjects  usually 
attributed  to  Caedmon,  afford  the  first  feeble  indications  of  an 
attempt  being  made  by  the  Saxons  to  convey  the  truths 
of  Scripture  in  their  vernacular  tongue.  Caedmon  lived  in 
the  seventh  century;  he  was  a  monk  in  the  monastery  of 
Streoneshalch  in  Northumbria.  His  poems  have  been  strung 
together  so  as  to  form  a  sort  of  metrical  paraphrase  on  some 
of  the  historical  books  of  Scripture.  He  commences  with  the 
fall  of  the  angels,  the  creation  and  fall  of  man,  and  proceeds 
to  the  history  of  the  deluge,  carrying  on  his  narrative  to  the 
history  of  the  children  of  Israel,  and  their  wanderings  in  the 
desert.  He  also  touches  on  the  history  of  Nebuchadnezzar 
and  of  Daniel.  The  authenticity  of  this  work  has  been  doubted, 
some  writers  being  of  opinion  that  it  was  written  by  different 
writers  at  different  periods ;  the  striking  similarity  between 
some  of  the  poems  and  certain  passages  in  Milton's  Paradise 
Lost  has  been  repeatedly  noticed.  Two  editions  have  been 
printed  ;  the  first  by  Francis  Junius  at  Amsterdam  in  1655, 
and  the  second,  with  an  English  translation  and  notes,  by  Mr. 
Thorpe,  in  London,  in  1832. 

The  literal  versions  of  such  portions  of  the  Scripture  as 
have  been  translated  into  Anglo-Saxon  have  chiefly  been  trans- 
mitted to  us  in  the  form  of  interlineations  of  Latin  MSS.  A 
Latin  Psalter,  said  to  have  been  sent  by  Pope  Gregory  to 
Augustine,  is  still  preserved  among  the  Cottonian  MSS.,  and 
contains  an  Anglo-Saxon  interlinear  version,  of  which  the  date 
is  unknown.  Aldhelm,  bishop  of  Sherborne,  and  Guthlac,  the 
first  Anglo-Saxon  anchorite,  translated  the  Psalms  soon  after 

the  commencement  of  the  eighth  century,  but  their  MSS.  are 
jj 


562  THE   ANGLO-SAXON   VERSIONS. 

lost,  and  nothing  is  known  with  certainty  respecting  them. 
The  same  may  be  said  concerning  the  portions  of  Scripture 
reported  to  have  been  translated  by  the  Venerable  Bede.  At 
the  time  of  his  death,  this  renowned  historian  was  engaged  in 
a  translation  of  the  Gospel  of  St.  John,  and  almost  with  his 
latest  breath  he  dictated  to  his  amanuensis  the  closing  verse 
of  the  Gospel.  Alfred  the  Great  also  took  part  in  the  trans- 
lation of  the  Scriptures.  He  translated  the  commandments 
in  the  twentieth  chapter  of  Exodus,  and  part  of  the  three  fol- 
lowing chapters,  which  he  affixed  to  his  code  of  laws.  He 
likewise  kept  a  "hand-boc,"  in  which  he  daily  entered  extracts 
from  various  authors,  but  more  especially  verses  of  Scripture 
translated  by  himself  from  Latin  into  Anglo-Saxon. 

There  are  three  different  versions  of  the  Four  Gospels  at 
present  known  to  be  in  existence.  The  most  ancient  of  these 
is  the  famous  Northumbrian  Gloss,  or  Durham  Book,  preserved 
among  the  Cottonian  MSS.  in  the  British  Museum.  This  MS. 
is  one  of  the  finest  specimens  extant  of  Saxon  writing.  The 
Vulgate  Latin  text  of  the  Four  Gospels  was  written  by  Ead- 
frid,  bishop  of  Lindisfarne,  about  A.  D.  680 ;  his  successor  in 
the  See  adorned  the  book  with  curious  illuminations,  and  with 
bosses  of  gold  and  precious  stones ;  and  a  priest  named  Aldred 
added  an  interlinear  gloss  or  version,  probably  about  the  year 
900.  The  second  Anglo-Saxon  version  of  the  Gospels  belongs 
to  the  tenth  century,  and  was  written  by  Farmen  and  Owen  at 
Harewood,  or  Harwood,  over  Jerome's  Latin  of  the  Four  Gos- 
pels. The  Latin  text  was  written  about  the  same  period  as 
that  of  the  Durham  Book,  having  been  made  during  the 
seventh  century.  This  valuable  MS.  is  in  the  Bodleian  Lib- 
rary, and  is  called  the  Rushworth  Gloss,  from  the  name  of  one 
of  its  former  proprietors.  The  other  translation  of  the  Gospels 
was  made  by  an  unknown  hand,  apparently  not  long  before  the 
Norman  conquest,  and  is  thought  to  have  been  translated  from 
the  Latin  version  which  was  in  use  before  Jerome's  time. 

Two  editions  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  Psalter  have  been  pub- 
lished. The  first  appeared  in  1640;  it  was  printed  in  London 
under  the  care  of  Spelman,  from  an  ancient  MS.  by  an  un- 
known translator,  and  collated  with  other  MSS.  of  equal  an- 
tiquity. This  version  was  undoubtedly  made  from  the  Latin 
Vulgate,  which  interlines  with  the  Anglo-Saxon.  A  splendid 
edition  of  the  Psalms  was  published  in  1835  at  Oxford:  the 
MS.  which  forms  the  text  formerly  belonged  to  the  Due  de 
Berri,  the  brother  of  Charles  V.,  king  of  France,  and  was  pre- 
served in  the  Royal  Library  at  Paris.     Mr.  Thorpe,  the  editor 


FORMATIVE  PERIOD   OF  THE  ENGLISH   LANGUAGE.      663 

attributed  this  MS.  to  the  eleventh  century ;  and  by  some  it 
is  supposed  to  be  a  transcript  of  the  version  executed  by  Aid- 
helm,  bishop  of  Sherborne,  in  the  early  part  of  the  eighth  cen- 
tury. It  is,  however,  rather  a  paraphrase  than  a  version,  and 
is  written,  partly  in  prose,  and  partly  in  metre. 

A  partial  interlinear  translation  ef  a  Latin  version  of  Pro- 
verbs, made  in  the  tenth  century,  is  preserved  among  the  Cot- 
tonian  MSS.  in  the  British  Museum.  To  the  same  century 
belong  the  celebrated  translations  of  .^Ifric,  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury :  they  consist  of  the  Heptateuch,  or  first  seven 
books  of  the  Bible,  and  the  book  of  Job.  An  edition  of  this 
version  was  published  by  Mr.  Thwaits,  at  Oxford,  in  1699, 
from  an  unique  MS.  belonging  to  the  Bodleian  Library ;  the 
book  of  Job  was  printed  from  a  transcript  of  a  MS.  in  the 
Cottonian  Library.  ^Ifric  in  some  portions  of  his  version  ad- 
heres literally  to  the  text ;  but  in  some  parts  he  appears  to 
aim  at  producing  a  condensation,  or  abridgment,  rather  than 
a  translation  of  the  events  related  by  the  inspired  historian. 
Like  the  other  Anglo-Saxon  fragments,  his  translation  was 
made  from  the  Latin  version. 

A  few  MSS.  of  the  Psalms,  written  shortly  before,  or  about 
the  time  of  the  Norman  Conquest  are  extant,  and  show  the 
gradual  decline  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  language.  The  history  of 
the  language  may  still  farther  be  traced  in  three  MSS.  yet  in 
existence,  which  were  made  after  the  arrival  of  the  Normans. 
They  are  MSS.  of  the  same  translation,  and  two  of  them  are 
attributed  to  the  reign  of  Henry  the  Second  :  but  the  language 
in  which  they  are  written  is  no  longer  pure  Anglo-Saxon ;  it 
has  merged  into  what  is  designated  the  Anglo-Norman. 

The  exact  period  of  the  transmutation  of  Saxon  into  Eng- 
lish has  been  disputed,  but  it  seems  most  reasonable  to  believe 
that  the  process  was  gradual.  A  fragment  of  the  Saxon 
Chronicle,  published  by  Lye,  and  concluding  with  the  year 
1079,  exhibits  the  language  in  the  first  stage  of  its  transition 
state,  no  great  deviation  having  then  been  made  from  Anglo- 
Saxon.  But  in  the  continuation  of  the  same  chronicle,  from 
1 135  to  1140  A.  D.,  the  commencement  of  those  changes  may 
be  distinctly  traced,  which  subsequently  formed  the  distinctive 
peculiarities  of  the  English  language.  The  principal  change 
introduced  about  this  period  was  the  gradual  substitution  of 
particles  and  auxiliary  words  for  the  terminal  inflections  of  the 
Anglo-Saxon.  The  English  has  happily  retained  the  facility 
of  its  parent  language  in  compounding  words,  the  only  diffe- 
rence in  this  respect  being,  that,  in  the  formation   of  its  com- 


564  EARLY   ENGLISH  VERSIONS  OF  SCRIPTURE. 

pound  terms,  the  Anglo-Saxon  drew  only  from  its  own  re- 
sources, whereas  the  English  has  had  recourse  to  the  Latin, 
the  Greek,  the  French,  the  Italian,  and  other  languages. 
It  has  been  remarked  by  a  distinguished  foreigner,  that 
"everywhere  the  principle  of  utility  and  application  dom- 
inates in  England,  and  constitutes  at  once  the  physiognomy 
and  the  force  of  its  civilization."  This  principle  is  certainly 
legible  in  its  language,  which  although  possessed  of  remarkable 
facility  in  the  adaptation  of  foreign  terms  and  even  idioms  to 
its  own  use,  is  at  the  same  time  free  from  the  trammels  with 
which  the  other  languages  of  its  class  are  encumbered.  In  the 
gender  of  nouns,  for  instance,  we  meet  with  no  perplexity  or 
anomaly,  every  noun  being  masculine,  feminine,  or  neuter,  ac- 
cording to  the  nature  of  the  object  or  idea  it  represents ;  and 
as  the  adjectives  are  all  indeclinable,  their  concordance  with 
the  noun  is  at  once  effected  without  the  apparently  useless 
trouble  of  altering  the  final  letters.  This  perfect  freedom  from 
useless  encumbrance  adds  greatly  to  the  ease  and  vigor  of  ex- 
pression. 

After  the  gradual  disappearance  of  the   Anglo-Saxon  and 
evolution  of  the  English  language,  the  Anglo-Saxon  versions 
became  useless  from  the  alteration  in  the  language,  and  until 
the  fourteenth  century  the  efforts  made  to  produce  a  new  trans- 
lation were  few  and  feeble.     An  ecclesiastic  named  Orm,  or 
Ormin,  supposed  from  his  dialect  to  have  been  a  native  of  the 
North  of    England,  composed  a  metrical   paraphrase   of   the 
Gospels  and  Acts,  in  lines  of  fifteen  syllables,  during  the  latter 
part  of  the  twelfth  century.     This  work  is  entitled  the  Ormu- 
lum,  from  the  name  of  its  author,  and  is  preserved  in  the  Bod- 
leian Library.     A  more  extensive  metrical  paraphrase,  com- 
prising the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  is  to  be  found  amongst 
other  poetry  of  a  religious  nature  in  a  work  entitled  Sowle-hele 
(Soul's  health),  belonging  to  the  Bodleian  Library :  it  is  usually 
ascribed  to  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century.     Another  metrical 
version,  probably  of  the  same  date,  is  preserved  in  Corpus 
Christi  College,  Cambridge :  it  comprises  only  the  first  two 
books  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  is  written  in  the  dialect  then 
spoken  in  the  north  of  England.  In  the  same  College,  a  metri- 
cal version  of  the  Psalms,  apparently  written  about  the  year 
1300,  has  been  deposited:  this  version  adheres  to  the  Latin 
Psalter,  corrected  by  Jerome,  as  closely  as  the  nature  of  the 
composition  will  admit.     Several  other  MSS.  of  the  old  Eng- 
lish Psalter,  preserved  in  the  British  Museum  and  the  Bodleian 
Library,  are  supposed  to  be  exemplars  of  the  same  version, 


wiclif's  version.  565 

with  the  orthography  altered  in  conformity  with  the  state  of 
the  language  at  the  periods  in  which  they  were  written.  A 
translation  of  the  Psalms  from  the  same  text  (the  corrected 
Latin  of  Jerome),  was  executed  by  Richard  Rolle,  of  Hampole, 
near  Doncaster,  during  the  early  part  of  the  fourteenth  century. 
This  version  is  remarkable  as  being  the  first  portion  of  the 
Scriptures  ever  translated  into  English  prose.  Rolle,  or  Ham- 
pole  as  he  is  more  generally  called,  also  wrote  a  paraphrase  in 
verse  of  a  part  of  Job.  Two  other  versions  of  the  Psalms,  be- 
longing to  the  same  period,  are  likewise  extant.  In  Bene't 
College,  Cambridge,  there  is  a  version  of  Mark,  Luke,  and  the 
Pauline  Epistles,  but  the  translator  and  the  date  are  unknown  ; 
and  in  the  British  Museum  there  is  a  translation  of  the  Gospels 
appointed  to  be  read  on  Sundays,  written  in  the  northern 
dialect. 

A  version  has  been  commonly  ascribed  to  John  de  Trevisa, 
vicar  of  Berkeley  in  Gloucestershire,  who  flourished  toward  the 
close  of  the  fourteenth  century ;  but  he  only  translated  a  few 
detached  passages,  which  he  introduced  in  certain  parts  of  his 
writings.  Some  texts  translated  by  him  were  painted  on  the 
walls  of  the  chapel  belonging  to  Berkeley  Castle. 

During  the  years  from  1378  to  1380,  John  Wiclif  trans- 
lated the  entire  Scripture  from  the  Latin  Vulgate.* 

Although  Wiclif's  version  of  the  English  Bible  was  the 
earliest  in  point  of  execution,  yet,  as  the  art  of  printing  was 
unknown  during  the  age  in  which  it  was  produced,  it  was 
among  the  latest  of  the  English  versions  in  being  committed 
to  the  press.  The  first  printed  edition  was  published  in  1731, 
by  Mr.  Lewis.  This  edition,  which  was  preceded  by  a  history 
of  the  English  biblical  translations,  by  the  editor,  included 
only  the  New  Testament.  The  same  version  of  the  New 
Testament  was  re-edited  in  18 10  by  H.  H.  Baber,  with  prolego- 

*John  Wiclif  was  born  in  York  in  1334.  He  studied  at  Oxford,  and  by- 
intrigues  afterwards  obtained  the  position  of  master  in  Balliol  College  from 
which  post  the  friars  had  been  ousted.  The  friars  appealed  to  the  Pope,  and 
he  restored  them.  Wiclif  then  raised  his  voice  against  Rome  and  the  tem- 
poral power. 

The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  summoned  Wiclif  to  defend  himself  be- 
fore a  Council  held  at  London  in  1377.  The  powerful  Duke  of  Lancaster 
defended  him,  and  he  was  absolved  by  the  Council.  Wiclif  was  in  grace  with 
the  State  because  he  advocated  the  giving  of  church  property  to  the  State, 
He  was  again  summoned  to  a  Council  at  Lambeth,  and  escaped  condemnation. 
The  bishops  of  England,  servile  to  the  State,  winked  at  heresy.  Those  were 
the  days  of  the  Schism  at  Rome  between  Urban  VI.  and  the  antipope. 
Clement  VII.  The  time  was  apt  for  the  theories  of  Wiclif.  He  preached 
much,  and  his  writings  were  spread  through  the  realm.     la  1383  the  Arch 


666  tyndale's  version. 

mena.  It  was  again  published  with  extreme  accuracy  in  1841, 
as  a  portion  of  the  English  Hexapla,  the  best  MSS.  having  been 
most  carefully  collated  for  this  purpose  by  George  Offor,  Esq.^ 
a  MS.  then  in  the  possession  of  the  Duke  of  Sussex  was  used 
as  the  basis  of  this  edition.  Another  edition  was  published 
by  Pickering  in  1848:  it  is  printed  from  a  contemporary  MS. 
written  about  A.  D.  1380,  formerly  in  the  monastery  of  Sion, 
and  now  preserved  in  the  collection  of  Lea  Wilson,  F.  S.  A. 
The  Old  Testament  of  Wiclif's  version  remained  in  MS.  till 
within  the  last  few  years ;  but  a  complete  edition  of  both  Testa- 
ments was  published  at  Oxford,  in  1850,  under  the  editorship 
of  J.  Forshall  and  Sir  F.  Madden. 

The  first  printed  edition  of  portions  of  the  English  protestant 
Bible  was  that  of  William  Tyndale,  an  apostate  priest,  hanged 
and  burnt  at  Vilvoorde  near  Brussels  in  1537. 

Tyndale  fled  from  England,  and  went  to  Hamburg,  where 
in  1524,  he  printed  an  English  version  of  the  Gospels  of 
Matthew  and  Mark,  consisting  of  thirty-one  leaves. 

From  Hamburg  he  proceeded  to  Cologne,  where  he  arrived 
in  the  end  of  April  or  in  the  beginning  of  May  1525,  accom- 
panied by  his  amanuensis,  William  Roye.  Here  he  completed 
the  New  Testament,  which  was  printed  in  quarto  by  Peter 
Quentel.  A  fragment  of  this,  which  was  not  discovered  until 
the  year  1834,  is  in  the  library  of  the  Honorable  Thomas  Gren- 
ville,  in  England.  It  comprises  "  The  Prologge"  in  part  of  the 
Gospel  of  St.  Matthew.  From  Cologne,  Tyndale  proceeded 
to  Worms,  where,  in  the  same  year,  he  completed  what  has 
hitherto  been  usually  termed  his  first  edition  of  the  New 
Testament.  It  was  printed  by  P.  Schoyffer  in  i8mo.  A  copy 
of  this  New  Testament,  wanting  only  the  title  page,  (the  only 
copy  in  this  state  now  known)  is  in  possession  of  the  Baptist 
Museum  at  Bristol.     From  this  edition  the   London   reprint 

bishop  of  Canterbury  condemned,  in  a  Council  held  at  London,24  propositions 
of  Wiclif ,  in  which  among  other  errors  he  denied  the  real  presence  of  Jesus 
Christ  in  the  Eucharist ;  affirmed  that  priest  or  bishop  in  state  of  mortal  sin 
could  not  baptise,  consecrate  or  ordain ;  declared  that  confession  was  useless 
to  a  contrite  man ;  denied  that  Christ  instituted  the  Mass ;  declared  that,  if 
the  Pope  were  in  sin,  he  had  no  authority  over  the  faithful ;  that  it  was 
against  the  Scriptures  for  the  ecclesiastics  to  have  property  ;  and  declared 
that  after  Urban  VI.  the  primacy  of  Peter  had  failed,  and  the  nations  should 
be  free  in  the  government  of  the  national  church.  Wiclif  died  at  Lutter- 
worth in  1384. 

The  opinions  of  Wiclif  invaded  Bohemia  and  gave  rise  to  the  heresy  of 
John  Huss.  The  remarkable  success  of  these  heresiarchs  is  due  to  the  fact 
that  they  extend  the  power  of  the  state,and  jQatter  the  pride  and  independence 
of  the  human  heart. 


tyndale's  version.  567 

of  1836  was  executed.  In  this  undertaking  Tyndale  was  as- 
sisted by  John  Fryth,  who  was  afterwards  burnt  in  Smithfield, 
and  by  John  Roye,  already  mentioned,  who  suffered  death  in 
Portugal,  on  a  charge  of  heresy.  Le  Long  calls  this  edition  of 
Tyndale's  New  Testament,  printed  in  1526,  "The  New  Testa- 
ment translated  into  English,  from  the  German  Version  of 
Luther."  Many  copies  of  this  translation  having  found  their 
way  into  England,  in  order  to  prevent  their  dispersion  among 
the  people,  and  the  more  effectually  to  enforce  the  prohibition 
published  in  all  the  dioceses  against  reading  them,  Tonstal, 
Bishop  of  London,  purchased  all  the  remaining  copies  of  this 
edition,  and  all  which  he  could  collect  from  private  hands,  and 
committed  them  to  the  flames  at  St.  Paul's  cross.  The  first 
impression  of  Tyndale's  translation  (as  it  is  usually  termed), 
being  thus  disposed  of,  a  surreptitious  edition  of  it  was  printed 
at  Antwerp  in  1526.  Of  this  no  copy  has  yet  been  identified  in 
any  collection.  A  second  surreptitious  edition  appeared  also 
at  Antwerp  in  1527,  and  a  third  in  1538-39. 

In  1529  Sir  Thomas  More  published  a  dialogue  in  which 
he  convicts  Tyndale  of  having  mistranslated  two  words  of 
great  importance,  viz.,  the  words  priests  and  church,  calling  the 
first   seniors,   and    the  second  congregation. 

He  also  charges  him  with  changing  commonly  the  term 
grace  into  favor,  confession  into  knowledge,  penance  into  re- 
pentance, and  a  contrite  heart  into  a  troubled  heart.  The 
Bishop  of  London  had,  indeed,  in  a  sermon,  declared,  that  he 
had  found  in  it  no  less  than  2000  errors,  or  mistranslations ; 
and  Sir  Thomas  More  discovered  about  1000  texts  falsely 
translated.  In  1530,  a  royal  proclamation  was  issued,  by  the 
advice  of  the  prelates  and  priests,  and  of  the  universities,  for 
totally  suppressing  the  translation  of  the  Scripture,  corrupted 
by  William  Tyndale.  The  proclamation  set  forth,  that  it  was 
not  necessary  to  have  the  Scriptures  in  the  English  tongue, 
and  in  the  hands  of  the  common  people  ;  that  the  distribution 
of  them,  as  to  allowing  or  denying  it,  depended  on  the  discre- 
tion of  their  superiors;  and  that,  considering  the  malignity  of 
the  time,  an  English  translation  of  the  Bible  would  rather 
occasion  the  continuance  or  increase  of  errors,  than  any  bene- 
fit to  their  souls.  However  the  proclamation  announced  the 
king's  intention,  if  the  present  translation  were  abandoned,  at 
a  proper  season  to  provide  that  the  Holy  Scriptures  should  be 
by  great,  learned,  and  Catholic  persons,  translated  into  the 
English  tongue,  if  it  should  then  seem  convenient.  In  the 
mean  time,  Tyndale  was  busily  employed.  In  1530,  he  printed 


668  coverdale's  version. 

at  Marburg  in  Hesse  (as  it  is  supposed)  his  own  second  edition 
of  the  New  Testament.  He  was  also  occupied  in  translating 
into  English  the  five  books  of  Moses,  in  which  he  was 
assisted  by  Miles  Coverdale.  The  books  of  Genesis  and 
Deuteronomy  appeared  also  at  Marburg  in  separate  books. 
In  1 53 1  he  published  the  Pentateuch,  with  a  general  preface 
and  a  second  edition  of  the  book  of  Genesis.  This  was 
printed  at  various  places  and  by  various  printers ;  its  rarity  is 
almost  equal  to  that  of  the  New  Testament  of  1525.  The 
only  perfect  copy  of  it  known  to  exist,  is  now  in  the  library 
of  the  Right  Hon.  Thomas  Grenville.  The  same  yearTyndale 
published  his  translation  of  the  Prophet  Jonah,  with  a  long 
prologue. 

As  Tyndale  was  ignorant  of  Hebrew,  he  made  us  of  Luther's 
version  in  his  translation  of  the  Old  Testament. 

This  first  English  translation  of  the  entire  Bible  was  made 
from  the  Latin  and  German,  and  dedicated  to  King  Henry 
VHL  by  Myles  CovERDALE.  It  bore  the  following  title: 
"  The  Bible,  that  is,  the  Holy  Scripture  of  the  Olde  and 
New  Testament  faithfully  and  truly  translated  out  of  the 
Douche  and  Latyn  into  Englishe.  M.  D.  XXXV.  folio." 
Soon  after  this  Bible  was  finished,  in  1536,  Lord  Crom- 
well, keeper  of  the  privy  seal,  and  the  king's  vicar-general 
and  vice-regent  in  ecclesiastical  matters,  published  injunc- 
tions to  the  clergy  by  the  King's  authority,  the  seventh 
of  which  required  that  every  parson,  or  proprietary  of  any 
parish  church  within  the  realm,  should,  before  the  first 
of  August,  provide  a  book  of  the  whole  Bible  either  in 
Latin  or  English,  and  lay  it  in  the  choir,  for  every  man 
that  would,  to  look  and  read  therein  ;  and  should  discour- 
age no  man  from  reading  any  part  of  the  Bible  either  in 
Latin  or  English,  but  rather  comfort,  exhort,  and  admonish 
every  man  to  read  it,  as  the  very  word  of  God,  and  the 
spiritual  food  of  a  man's  soul,  &c. 

In  1537  appeared  Matthew's  Bible,  under  the  following 
title : 

"  The  Byble,  which  is  all  the  Holy  Scripture  :  In  whych  are 
contayned  the  Olde  and  Newe  Testament,  truely  and  purely 
translated  into  Englysh.     By  Thomas  MATTHEW." 

It  was  edited  by  Coverdale,  though  it  bears  the  name  of 
Thomas  Matthew,  and  it  was  published  with  the  royal  license, 
which  was  granted  in  consequence  of  Cranmer's  applica- 
tion to  Lord  Cromwell.  The  Old  Testament  is  Tyndalc's 
to  the  end  of  the  second  book  of  Chronicles ;  it  then  becomes 


cranmer's  version.  569 

a  mere  copy  of  Coverdale's  Bible,  with  a  few  corrections,  and 
continues  so  to  the  end  of  the  Apocryphal  Books,  which  last 
are  inserted  from  Coverdale's  Bible.  The  New  Testament  is 
wholly  a  transcript  of  Tyndale's  version,  as  contained  in  his 
last  published  edition  of  the  New  Testament.  In  the  year 
1538,  an  injunction  was  published  by  Cromwell,  as  vicar-gen- 
eral of  the  kingdom,  ordaining  the  clery  to  provide,  before  a 
certain  festival,  one  book  of  the  whole  Bible,  of  the  largest 
volume,  in  English,  and  to  set  it  up  in  some  convenient  place 
within  their  churches,  where  their  parishioners  might  most 
commodiously  resort  to  it.  A  royal  declaration  was  also  pub- 
lished, which  the  curates  were  to  read  in  their  several  churches, 
informing  the  people,  that  it  had  pleased  the  king's  majesty 
to  permit  and  command  the  Bible,  being  translated  into  their 
mother-tongue,  to  be  sincerely  taught  by  them,  and  to  be 
openly  laid  forth  in  every  parish  church. 

In  1538,  an  edition  in  4to.  of  the  New  Testament,  in 
English,  with  Erasmus's  Latin  translation,  was  printed,  with 
the  king's  license,  by  Redman.  In  this  year  it  was  resolved  to 
revise  Matthew's  Bible,  and  to  print  a  correct  edition  of  it. 
With  this  view  Grafton  went  to  France,  where  the  workmen 
were  more  skilful,  and  the  paper  was  both  better  and  cheaper 
than  in  England,  and  obtained  permission  from  Francis  I.,  at 
the  request  of  King  Henry  VIII.,  to  print  his  Bible  at  Paris. 
But,  the  Inquisition  interposed,  and  issued  an  order,  dated 
December  17,  1538,  summoning  the  French  printers,  their 
English  employers,  and  Coverdale,  the  corrector  of  the  work, 
and  prohibiting  them  to  proceed  ;  and  the  impression,  con- 
sisting of  25(X)  copies,  was  seized,  confiscated,  and  condemned 
to  the  flames.  Some  chests,  however,  of  these  books  escaped 
the  fire,  and  the  English  proprietors,  who  had  fled  on  the  first 
alarm,  returned  to  Paris  as  soon  as  it  subsided,  and  not  only 
recovered  some  of  these  copies,  but  brought  with  them  to 
London  the  presses,  types,  and  printers,  and  resuming  the  work, 
finished  it  in  the  following  year. 

As  soon  as  the  papal  power  was  abolished  in  England,  and 
the  king's  supremacy  settled  by  parliament  in  1534,  Cran- 
mer  was  very  assiduous  in  promoting  the  translation  of  the 
Holy  Scripture  into  the  vulgar  tongue ;  well  knowing  how 
much  the  progress  of  the  reformation  depended  upon  this 
measure.  Accordingly,  he  moved  in  convocation,  that  a  peti- 
tion should  be  presented  to  the  king  for  leave  to  procure  a 
new  translation  of  the  Bible.  This  motion  was  vigorously 
opposed  by  Gardiner,  bishop  of  Winchester,  and  his  party ; 


570  taverner's  correction. 

but  Cranmer  prevailed.  The  arguments  for  a  new  translation, 
urged  by  Cranmer,  and  enforced  by  Queen  Anne  Boleyn,  who 
had  then  great  interest  in  the  king's  affections,  were  so  much 
considered  by  him,  that,  notwithstanding  the  opposition,  public 
and  private,  on  the  part  of  Gardiner  and  his  adherents,  Henry 
gave  orders  for  setting  about  it  immediately.  In  April,  1539, 
Grafton  and  Whitchurch  printed  the  Bible,  under  the  follow- 
ing title :  "  The  Byble  in  Englyshe>  that  is  to  saye,  the  contents 
of  all  the  holy  scripture  bothe  of  y*  olde  and  newe  testament, 
truly  translated  after  the  veryte  of  the  Hebrue  and  Greke 
textes  by  y'  dylygent  studye  of  diuerse  excellent  learned  men, 
expert  in  the  forsayde  tonges.  Printed  by  Rychard  Grafton 
&  Edward  Whitchurch.  Cum  privilegio  ad  imprimendum 
solum."  From  its  containing  a  prologue  or  preface  by 
Cranmer,  as  well  as  from  its  size,  it  is  commonly  called 
"  Cranmer's  Great  Bible."  A  magnificent  and  probably  unique 
copy  of  it,  on  vellum  (bound  in  three  volumes),  which  formerly 
belonged  to  Henry  VHI.,  is  preserved  in  the  Library  of  the 
British  Museum. 

In  1539  Richard  Taverner  endeavored  to  revise  in  some 
measure  the  very  corrupt  Bible  of  Matthew.  His  correction 
was  a  further  corruption. 

After  the  death  of  Cromwell,  King  Henry  was  brought  to 
see  that  in  truth  the  English  translations  were  erroneous  and 
heretical,  and  although  the  wily  Cranmer  strove  to  defeat  such 
project.  Parliament  forbade  Tyndale's  version,  and  the  King 
soon  afterward  prohibited,  by  royal  proclamation,  the  having 
and  reading  of  Wiclif's,  Tyndale's  and  Coverdale's  versions,  and 
forbade  the  use  of  any  other  than  that  made  by  Parliament. 

Edward  VI.  revoked  this  decree. 

In  November,  1539,  the  king,  at  the  intercession  of  Cran- 
mer, appointed  Lord  Cromwell  to  take  special  care  that  no 
person  within  the  realm  should  attempt  to  print  any  English 
Bible  for  five  years,  but  such  as  should  be  admitted  by  Lord 
Cromwell ;  and  assigns  this  reason  for  the  prohibition,  that  the 
Bible  should  be  considered  and  perused  in  one  translation,  in 
order  to  avoid  the  manifold  inconveniences  to  which  human 
frailty  might  be  subject  from  a  diversity  of  translations,  and 
the  ill  use  that  might  be  made  of  it.  In  the  year  1540,  two 
privileged  editions  of  the  Bible,  which  had  been  printed  in 
the  preceding  year,  issued  from  the  press  of  Edward  Whit- 
church. Lewis  mentions  three  other  impressions  of  the 
"  Great  Bible,"  which  appeared  in  the  course  of  this  year ;  two 
printed    by    Whitchurch,    and   one   by   Peyt   and    Redman. 


THE   GENEVA  VERSION.  571 

Cranmer  wrote  a  preface  for  the  editions  of  the  year  1540, 
from  which  we  learn  the  opinions  and  practice  of  those  times. 
In  May  of  this  year,  the  curates  and  parishioners  of  every 
parish  were  required  by  royal  proclamation,  to  provide  them- 
selves with  the  Bible  of  the  largest  volume  before  the  feast  of 
All  Saints,  under  the  penalty  of  40s.  for  every  month  during 
which  they  should  be  without  it. 

During  the  course  of  this  reign,  that  is,  in  less  than  seven 
years  and  six  months,  eleven  impressions  of  the  whole  English 
Bible  were  published,  and  six  of  the  English  New  Testament ; 
besides  an  English  translation  of  the  whole  New  Testament, 
paraphrased  by  Erasmus.  The  Bibles  were  reprinted,  accord- 
ing to  the  preceding  editions,  whether  Tyndale's,  Coverdale's, 
Matthew's,  Cranmer's  or  Taverner's ;  that  is,  with  a  different 
text,  and  different  notes.  But  it  is  doubted  by  the  writer  of 
the  preface  to  King  James's  translation,  whether  there  were 
any  translation,  or  correction  of  a  translation,  in  the  course  of 
this  reign. 

In  1557  William  Whittingham  published  at  Geneva  the 
New  Testament  under  the  following  title  : 

"  The  Newe  Testament  of  our  Lord  lesus  Christ,  conferred 
diligently  with  the  Greke  and  best  approued  translations. 
With  the  arguments  as  well  before  the  chapters,  as  for  euery 
Boke  &  Epistle,  also  diuersities  of  readings,  and  most  profit- 
able annotations  of  all  harde  places :  whereunto  is  added  a 
copious  Table.  At  Geneva.  Printed  by  Conrad  Badius. 
1560.  8vo." 

It  is  the  first  in  the  English  language  which  contains  the 
distinction  of  verses  by  numerical  figures.  When  Queen 
Elizabeth  passed  through  London  from  the  Tower  to  her 
coronation,  a  pageant  was  erected  in  Cheapside,  representing 
Time  coming  out  of  a  cave,  and  leading  a  person  clothed  in 
white  silk,  who  represented  Truth,  his  daughter.  Truth  had 
the  English  Bible  in  her  hand,  on  which  was  written  "  Verbum 
veritatis."  Truth  addressed  the  queen,  and  presented  her 
with  the  book.  She  kissed  it,  held  it  in  her  hand,  laid  it  on 
her  breast,  greatly  thanking  the  city  for  their  present,  and 
added,  that  she  would  often  and  diligently  read  it. 

We  could  say  verily  that  this  Bible  was  much  like  Eliza- 
beth, false  and  unholy. 

In  1560  a  translation  of  the  entire  Bible  appeared  at  Geneva 
under  the  following  title: 

"The  Bible:  that  is,  the  Holy  Scriptures,  conteyned  in  the 
Olde    and    Newe   Testament.     Translated   according   to    the 


572  THE  bishops'  bible. 

Ebrue  and  Greke,  and  conferred  with  the  best  translations  in 
divers  languages,  with  most  profitable  annotations  upon  all 
the  harde  places,  and  other  things  of  great  importance,  as  may 
appeare  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Reader.  At  Geneva.  Printed 
by  Rouland  Hall.     MDLX.     4to." 

A  second  edition  of  this  translation  appeared  in  folio  at 
London,  in  1561 ;  a  third  in  quarto,  at  Geneva,  in  1563;  a 
fourth,  at  Geneva,  in  1569.  It  was  reprinted  at  London  in 
1575,  by  Thomas  Vautrollier;  in  1576,  by  Christopher  Barker, 
in  folio,  and  also  in  quarto,  and  many  times  consequently  by 
him  and  by  other  printers.  The  translators  are  commonly  said 
to  have  been  Miles  Coverdale,  pseudo  bishop  of  Exeter, 
Anthony  Gilby,  and  William  Whittingham.  Besides  the 
translation,  the  editors  of  the  Geneva  Bible  noted  in  the 
margin  the  diversities  of  speech  and  reading,  especially  accord- 
ing to  the  Hebrew ;  then  inserted  in  the  text,  with  another 
kind  of  letter,  every  word  that  seemed  to  be  necessary  for  ex- 
plaining any  particular  sentence ;  in  the  division  of  the  verses, 
they  followed  the  Hebrew  examples,  and  added  the  number 
to  each  verse ;  they  also  noted  the  principal  matters,  and  the 
arguments,  both  for  each  book  and  each  chapter ;  they  set  over 
the  head  of  every  page  some  remarkable  word  or  sentence,  for 
helping  the  memory;  they  introduced  brief  annotations  for 
ascertaining  the  text,  and  explaining  obscure  words ;  they  set 
forth  with  figures  certain  places  in  the  books  of  Moses,  of 
Kings,  and  Ezekiel,  which  could  not  be  made  intelligible  by 
any  other  description ;  they  added  maps  of  divers  places  and 
countries  mentioned  in  the  Old  and  New  Testament ;  and  they 
annexed  two  tables,  one  for  the  interpretation  of  Hebrew 
names,  and  the  other  containing  all  the  chief  matters  of  the 
whole  Bible.  Of  this  translation,  numerous  editions  were 
printed  in  folio,  4to.,  or  8vo.,  between  the  years  1560  and  1616. 

This  version  is  sometimes  called  the  "  Breeches  Bible,"  be- 
cause the  translators  rendered  the  Hl^l^H  o^  Genesis  IIL  7, 
by  "breeches."  ' 

In  the  year  1598,  the  Bible,  proposed  by  the  pseudo  Arch- 
bishop Parker  three  years  before,  was  completed.  In  this  edi- 
tion, distinct  portions  of  the  Bible,  at  least  fourteen  in  number, 
were  allotted  to  select  men  of  learning  and  ability,  appointed, 
as  Fuller  says,  by  the  Queen's  commission ;  but  it  still  remains 
uncertain  who,  and  whether  one  or  more,  revised  the  rest  of 
the  New  Testament.  Eight  of  the  persons  employed  were 
pseudo  bishops ;  whence  the  book  was  called  the  "  Bishops' 
Bible,"  and  the  "  Great  English  Bible."     In  a  letter  addressed 


KING  JAMES'   VERSION.  573 

by  Parker  to  Queen  Elizabeth,  on  the  publication  of  this 
edition  of  the  Bible,  we  meet  with  the  following  account  of 
what  had  been  attempted  in  it : — "  Amonge  divers  observations 
which  have  bin  regarded  in  this  recognition,  one  was,  not  to 
make  yt  vary  much  from  that  translation  which  was  commonlye 
used  by  publicke  order,  except  wher  eyther  the  verytie  of  the 
Hebrue  and  Greke  moved  alteration  ;  or  wher  the  Text  was, 
by  sum  negligence,  mutilated  from  the  originall ;  so  that  I 
trust  your  loving  subjected  shall  se  good  cause,  in  your 
Majesties  dayes,  to  thanke  God,  and  to  rejoyce  to  see  this  His 
Treasor  of  His  Holy  Worde  so  set  oute,  as  may  be  proved  (so 
far  as  mortall  man's  knowledge  can  attaine  to,  or  as  far  forth 
as  God  hath  hitherto  revealed)  to  be  faithfully  handeled  in  the 
vulgar  Tonge."  This  translation  was  used  in  the  churches  for 
forty  years  ;  though  the  Geneva  Bible  was  more  read  in  private 
houses. 

The  Bishops'  Bible  did  not  satisfy  the  bishops,  and  soon 
after  King  James  ascended  the  throne,  in  1602,  he  was  moved 
to  give  orders  for  a  new  version. 

Fifty-four  learned  men  were  appointed  to  this  important 
labor:  but,  before  it  was  commenced,  seven  of  the  persons 
nominated  were  either  dead  or  had  declined  the  task ;  for  the 
list,  as  given  us  by  Fuller,  comprises  only  forty-seven  names. 
They  were  divided  into  six  classes.  Ten  were  to  meet  at 
Westminister,  and  to  translate  from  the  Pentateuch  to  the  end 
of  the  second  book  of  Kings.  Eight,  assembled  at  Cambridge, 
were  to  finish  the  rest  of  the  Historical  Books  and  the 
Hagiographa.  At  Oxford,  seven  were  to  undertake  the  four 
greater  prophets,  with  the  Lamentations  of  Jeremiah,  and  the 
twelve  minor  prophets.  The  four  Gospels,  Acts  of  the 
Apostles,  and  the  Apocalyse,  were  assigned  to  another  com- 
pany of  eight,  also  at  Oxford :  and  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul, 
together  with  the  remaining  Canonical  Epistles,  were  allotted  to 
another  company  of  seven,  at  Westminister.  Lastly,  another 
company  at  Cambridge  were  to  translate  the  remaining  books, 
including  the  Prayer  of  Manasseh. 

Of  this  Home  testifies  as  follows : 

"  Each  book  passed  the  scrutiny  of  all  the  translators  suc- 
cessively. In  the  first  instance,  each  individual  translated 
every  book  which  was  allotted  to  his  division.  Secondly,  the 
readings  to  be  adopted  were  agreed  upon  by  the  whole  of  that 
company  assembled  together,  at  which  meeting  each  translator 
must  have  been  solely  occupied  by  his  own  version.  The  book, 
thus  finished,  was  sent  to  each  of  the  other  companies  to  be 


574  KING  JAMES'   VERSION. 

examined  ;  and  at  these  meetings  it  probably  was,  as  Selden 
informs  us,  that  "  one  read  the  translation,  the  rest  holding  in 
their  hands  some  Bible,  either  of  the  learned  tongues,  or 
French,  Spanish,  Italian,  &c.  If  they  found  any  fault,  they 
spoke ;  if  not,  he  read  on."  Further,  the  translators  were  em- 
powered to  call  to  their  assistance  any  learned  men,  whose 
studies  enabled  them  to  be  serviceable,  when  an  urgent  occasion 
of  difficulty  presented  itself.  The  translation  was  commenced 
in  the  spring  of  1607,  and  the  completion  of  it  occupied 
almost  three  years.  At  the  expiration  of  that  time,  three 
copies  of  the  whole  Bible,  thus  translated  and  revised,  were 
sent  to  London, — one  from  Oxford,  one  from  Cambridge,  and 
a  third  from  Westminister.  Here  a  committee  of  six,  two 
being  deputed  by  the  companies  at  Oxford,  two  by  those  at 
Cambridge,  and  two  by  those  at  Westminister,  reviewed  and 
polished  the  whole  work :  which  was  finally  revised  by  Dr. 
Smith  (afterwards  bishop  of  Gloucester),  who  wrote  the  preface, 
and  by  Dr.  Bilson,  bishop  of  Winchester.  This  translation  of 
the  Bible  was  first  published  in  folio  in  1611 :  the  expense  at- 
tending it  was  wholly  defrayed  by  Robert  Barker,  patentee  of 
the  office  of  King's  printer. 

After  the  publication  of  the  present  authorized  translation, 
all  the  other  versions  gradually  fell  into  disuse,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  the  Psalms,  and  the  Epistles  and  Gospels  in  the  Book 
of  Common  Prayer,  which  were  still  continued,  the  former 
according  to  the  translation  of  Cranmer's  Bible,  and  the  latter 
according  to  that  of  the  Bishops'  Bible,  until  the  final  revision 
of  the  Liturgy,  in  1661  ;  at  which  time  the  Epistles  and 
Gospels  were  taken  from  the  present  version,  but  the  Psalms 
are  still  retained  according  to  the  translation  of  Cranmer's 
Bible." 

King  James'  version  possessed  considerable  literary  excel- 
lence, and  were  it  purged  from  doctrinal  incorrectness,  would 
be  valuable  for  English  readers.  It  often  reproduces  the  sense 
of  the  original  tongues  better  than  any  other  modern 
version. 

King  James'  version  has  very  recently  been  revised  by 
British  and  American  scholars,  but  it  is  certain  that  this 
revision  has  robbed  the  English  text  of  much  of  its  excellence. 
Rev.  Daniel  R.  Goodwin,  a  protestant  divine,  has  ably  shown 
the  abortion  of  the  revision  of  the  New  Testament.  (Notes 
on  the  Late  Revision  of  the  New  Testament  Version  :  New 
York,  1883.) 


THE  RHEIMS-DOUAY  VERSION.  575 

In  the  year  1582,  William  (afterward  Cardinal)  Allen, 
Gregory  Martin  and  Richard  Bristow  made  a  translation  of 
the  New  Testament  at  the  English  Catholic  college  of  Rheims, 
under  the  following  title  : 

The  New  Testament  of  lesvs  Christ,  translated  faithfvlly 
into  English  out  of  the  authentical  Latin,  according  to  the 
best  corrected  copies  of  the  same,  diligently  conferred  with 
the  Greeke,  and  other  editions  in  diuers  languages :  Vvith 
Argvments  of  bookes  and  chapters,  Annotations,  and  other 
necessarie  helpes,  for  the  better  vnderstanding  of  the  text,  and 
specially  for  the  discouerie  of  the  Corrvptions  of  diuers  late 
translations,  and  for  cleering  the  Controversies  in  religion,  of 
these  daies :  In  the  English  College  of  Rhemes.  Printed  at 
Rhemes  by  lohn  Fogny.     1582.  4to. 

Thomas  Worthington  affixed  the  notes  to  the  text.  From 
the  place  of  its  origin  it  was  called  the  Rheims  version.  After 
the  college  was  removed  to  Douay,  the  same  scholars  trans- 
lated the  Old  Testament  under  the  title : 

The  Holie  Bible  faithfvlly  translated  into  English  ovt  of 
the  Avthentical  Latin.  Diligently  conferred  with  the  Hebrew, 
Greeke,  and  other  Editions  in  diuers  languages.  With  Argv- 
ments of  the  Bookes,  and  Chapters  :  Annotations  :  Tables  :  and 
other  helpes  for  better  vnderstanding  of  the  text :  for  dis- 
couerie of  corrvptions  in  some  late  translations :  and  for  clear- 
ing Controversies  in  Religion.  By  the  English  College  of 
Doway  by  Lavrence  Kellam.     1609-10.     2  vols.  4to. 

These  being  united  form  the  Rheims-Douay  Bible,  the 
*' editio  princeps"  of  all  English  Catholic  versions.  In  1750 
it  was  revised  by  Dr.  Challoner,  and  this  revision  is  the  one 
usually  in  use. 

The  Rheims-Douay  version  is  not  of  high  critical  worth.  As 
it  agrees  with  the  Vulgate  in  nearly  everything,  it  enjoys,  in  a 
certain  sense,  the  doctrinal  immunity  from  error  of  the  Vul- 
gate. This  can  not  be  said  of  any  other  existing  English 
translation.  But  it  also  largely  contains  the  imperfections  of 
the  Vulgate.  The  work  of  making  a  new  translation  has  often 
been  spoken  of,  but  owing  to  the  vastness  of  the  enterprise, 
has  never  been  put  into  effect.  Catholic  scholars  recognize 
the  need,  and  let  us  hope  that  ere  long  some  ripe  and  good 
scholar  may  take  it  up  and  finish  it.  This  work  can  not  be  done 
as  a  business  enterprise.  To  execute  it  well,  will  require  the 
true  student,  and  the  sustained  study  and  labor  of  a  lifetime. 

The  annexed  plates  exhibit  specimens  of  the  early  English 
translations. 


ENGLISH. 

SPECIMEN,  FEOM  St.  JOHN,  Chap.  i.  r.  1  to  12. 


Wici-ip,  1380. 


•  IN  the  bigrnnyng^  was 
the  word  and  the  word  was 
at  god,  and  god  was  the  word, 
2  this  was  in  the  bigynnynge 
at  god,  3  alle  thingis  weren 
made  bi  hym  :  and  withouten 
hym  was  made  no  thing, 
that  thing  that  was  made  *  in 
him  was  liif,  and  the  liif  was 
the  lijt  of  men,  *  and  the  lijt 
schyneth  in  derknessist  and 
derknessis  comprehendiden 
not  it. 

6  A  man  was  sente  fro  god 
to  whom  the  name  was  Ion, 
'  this  man  cam  in  to  witnes- 
synge,  that  he  schulde  here 
witnessynge  of  the  li3t,  that 
alle  men  schulden  bileue  bi 
hym,  8  he  was  not  the  lijt, 
but  that  he  schulde  here 
witnessynge  of  the  lijt,  9  ther 
was  a  verri  li3t :  whiche  li5t- 
neth  eche  man  that  cometh  in 
to  this  world,  •<•  he  was  in 
the  world,  and  the  world  was 
made  bi  him  i  and  the  world 
knewe  hym  not. 

"  he  cam  in  to  his  owne 
thingis  :  S  hise  resceyueden 
hym  not:  '*  but  hou  many 
euer  resceiueden  hym  :  he 
3af  to  hem  power  to  be  made 
the  sones  of  god,  to  hem  that 
bileueden  in  his  name. 


Ttndai-e,   1534. 

I  IN  the  beginnynge  was 
the  worde,  and  the  worde 
was  with  God :  and  the  worde 
was  God.  2  The  same  was 
in  the  beginnynge  with  God. 
3  All  thinges  were  made  by 
it,  and  with  out  it,  was  made 
nothinge,  that  was  made. 
*  In  it  was  lyfe,  and  the  lyfe 
was  the  lyght  of  men,  *  and 
the  lyght  shyneth  in  the 
darcknes,  but  the  darcknes 
comprehended  it  not. 

*  There  was  a  man  sent 
from  God,  whose  name  was 
lohn.  ^  The  same  cam  as  a 
witnes  to  beare  witnes  of  the 
lyght,  that  all  men  through 
him  myght  believe.  8  He  was 
not  that  lyght :  but  to  beare 
witnes  of  the  lyght.  9  That 
was  a  true  lyght,  which 
lyghteth  all  men  that  come 
into  the  worlde.  'O  He  was 
in  the  worlde,  and  the  worlde 
was  made  by  him:  and  yet 
the  worlde  knewe  him  not. 

II  He  cam  iamonge  his 
(awne)  and  his  awne  re- 
ceaved  him  not.  i*  But  as 
meny  as  receaved  him,  to 
them  he  gave  power  to  be 
the  sonnes  of  God  in  that 
they  beleved  on  his  name. 


CoVEBBiJLE,    1535. 

IN  the  begynnynge  was 
the  worde,  and  the  worde 
was  with  God,  and  God  was 
y*  worde.  The  same  was  in 
the  begynnynge  with  God. 
All  thinges  were  made  by 
the  same,  and  without  the 
same  was  made  nothings  that 
was  made.  In  him  was  the 
life,  and  the  life  was  the 
light  of  men ;  and  the  light 
shyneth  in  the  darknesse, 
and  the  darkness  compre- 
hended it  not. 

There  was  sent  from  God  a 
man,  whose  name  was  Ihon. 
The  same  came  for  a  wit- 
nesse,  to  beare  wytnesse  of 
y*  light,  that  thorow  him 
they  all  might  beleue.  He 
was  not  that  light,  but  that 
he  might  beare  witnesse  of 
y*  light.  That  was  the  true 
light,  which  lighteth  all  men, 
that  come  in  to  this  worlde. 
He  was  in  the  worlde,  i  the 
worlde  was  made  by  him, 
and  y*  worlde  knewe  him 
not. 

He  came  in  to  his  awne, 
and  his  awne  receaued  him 
not.  But  as  many  as  re- 
ceaued him,  to  them  gaue  he 
power  to  be  the  children  of 
God :  euen  soch  as  beleue  in 
his  name. 


Matthew,  1537. 


IN  the  beginninge  was 
the  worde,  and  the  worde  was 
with  God :  and  the  worde  was 
God.  The  same  was  in  the 
beginnynge  wyth  God.  All 
thinges  were  made  by  it,  and 
wythout  it,  was  made  no- 
thynge  that  'was  made.  In  it 
was  lyfe,  and  the  lyfe  was 
the  lyght  of  men,  and  the 
lyght  shyneth  in  y*  darck- 
nes but  the  darcknes  com- 
prehended it  not. 

There  was  a  man  sent  from 
God,  whose  name  was  John. 
The  same  cam  as  a  witnes 
to  beare  wytnes  of  the  lyght, 
that  all  men  through  him 
myght  beleue.  He  was  not 
that  lyght :  but  to  beare  witnes 
of  the  lyght.  That  was  a  true 
lyght  wnych  lyghteth  all  me 
that  come  into  the  worlde.  Ho 
was  in  the  worlde,  and  the 
worlde  was  made  by  hym : 
and  yet  the  worlde  knewe  nym 
not. 

He  cam  amonge  hys  awne, 
and  hys  awne  receaued  hym 
not.  But  as  many  as  re- 
ceaued hym,  to  them  he  gaue 
power  to  be  the  sonnes  of 
God  in  that  they  beleued  on 
hys  name : 


Cbanmsb,  1539. 

1  IN  the  begynnynge  was 
the  worde,  and  the  worde 
was  wyth  God :  and  God 
was  the  wordfe.  2  The  same 
was  in  the  begynnyng  with 
God.  3  All  thynges  were 
made  by  it,  and  without  it, 
was  made  nothynge  that  was 
made.  *  In  it  was  lyfe,  and 
the  lyfe  was  the  lyght  of 
men,  *  and  the  lyght  shyn- 
eth in  darcknes,  and  the 
darcknes  comprehended  it 
not. 

6  There  was  sent  from  God 
a  man,  whose  name  was  lohn. 
7  The  same  cam  as  a  wytnes 
to  beare  wytnes  of  the  lyght, 
that  all  men  through  hym 
myght  beleue.  8  He  was 
not  that  lyght :  but  was  sent 
to  beare  wytnes  of  the  lyght. 
9  That  lyght  was  the  true 
lyght,  whych  lyghteth  euery 
man  that  cometh  into  the 
worlde.  ">  He  was  in  the 
worlde,  and  the  worlde  was 
made  by  hym  :  and  the 
worlde  knewe  hym  not. 

"  He  cam  amonge  hys 
awne,  and  hys  awne  re- 
ceaued him  not.  >2  £ut  as 
many  as  receaued  hym  to 
them  gaue  he  power,  to  be 
the  sonnes  of  God :  euen  them 
that  beleued  on  hys  name. 


Geneva,  1557. 
1  IN  the  beginnyng  was 
the  word,  and  the  worde  was 
with  God,  and  that  worde 
was  God.  2  The  same  was 
in  the  begynnyng  with  God. 
3  Althinges  were  made  by  it, 
and  without  it  was  made 
nothing  that  was  made.  <  In 
it  was  lyfe,  and  the  Ivfe  was 
the  light  of  men.  ^  ^nd  the 
light  shineth  in  darkenes,  and 
the  darknes  comprehended  it 
not.  6  There  was  a  man  sent 
from  God,  whose  name  was 
lohn.  7  The  same  came  for 
a  wytnes,  to  bearie  wytnes  of 
the  light,  that  all  men  through 
hym  might  beleue.  8  He  was 
not  that  light,  but  was  sent  to 
beare  wytnes  of  the  light. 

9  That  was  that  true  lyght, 
which  lyghteth  all  men  that 
come  into  the  worlde.  '0  He 
was  in  the  worlde,  and  the 
worlde  was  made  by  hym: 
and  the  worlde  knewe  him 
not.  ■!  He  came  among  his 
owne,  and  his  owne  receaued 
him  not. 

12  But  as  many  as  receaued 
hym,  to  them  he  gaue  power 
to  be  the  sonnes  of  God,  euen 
to  them  that  beleue  in  his 


Bishops,  1568. 

I  IN  the  begynnyng  was 
the  worde,  and  the  worde  was 
with  God :  and  that  worde 
was  God.  2  The  same  was 
in  the  begynnyng  with  God. 
3  All  thynges  were  made  by 
it :  and  without  it,  was  made 
nothyng  that  was  made.  ■*  In 
it  was  lyfe,  and  the  lyfe  was 
the  lyght  of  men.  ^  And  the 
lyght  shyneth  in  darkenesse : 
and  the  darkenesse  compre- 
hended it  not. 

6  There  was  a  man  sent 
from  God  whose  name  was 
John :  7  The  same  came  for  a 
witnesse,  to  beare  witnesse 
of  the  lyght,  that  all  men 
through  hym  myght  beleue. 
8  He  was  not  that  lyght : 
but  was  sent  to  beare  wit- 
nesse, of  the  lyght.  9  That 
[lyght}  was  the  true  lyght, 
which  lyghteth  every  man 
that.commeth  into  the  worlde. 
10  He  was  in  the  worlde,  and 
the  worlde  was  made  by  hym, 
and  the  worlde  knewe  hym 
not. 

II  He  came  among  his 
ov?ne,  and  his  owne  receaued 
hym  not.  12  But  as  many 
as  receaued  hym,  to  them 
gave  he  power  to  be  the  sonnes 
of  God,  euen  them  that  be 
leued  on  his  name. 


Rreims,  1582. 

I  IN  the  beginning  was 
the  Word,  and  the  Wobd 
was  with  God,  and  God  was 
the  WoBD.  2  This  was  in 
the  beginning  with  God. 
3  Al  things  were  made  by 
him  :  and  without  him  was 
made  nothing.  That  which 
was  made,  <  in  him  was 
life,  and  the  life  was  the 
light  of  men :  ^  and  the  light 
shineth  in  darkenesse,  and 
the  darkenesse  did  not  com- 
prehend it.  *  There  was  a 
man  sent  from  God,  whose 
name  was  lohn.  1  This  man 
came  for  testimonie :  to  giue 
testimonie  of  the  light,  that 
al  might  beleeue  through  him. 

8  He  was  not  the  light, 
but  to  giue  testimonie  of  the 
light.  9  It  was  the  true  light, 
which  lighteneth  euesy  man 
that  commeth  into  this  world. 
10  He  was  in  the  world,  and 
the  world  was  made  by  him, 
and  the  world  knew  him 
not. 

II  He  came  into  his  owne, 
and  his  owne  received  him 
not  12  But  as  many  as  re- 
ceiued  him,  he  gaue  them 
power  to  be  made  the  sonnes 
of  God,  to  those  that  beleeue 
in  his  name. 


BIBLICAL   HERMENEUTICS,  577 

Chapter  XXXII. 
Biblical  Hermeneutics. 

In  the  acquisition  of  all  knowledge,  man  should  order  all 
its  different  branches  to  one  grand  scope :  namely,  to  develop 
the  powers  of  the  soul,  and  make  the  being  of  man  godlike. 
Now  in  that  cultivation  of  the  soul,  the  science  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture is  most  immediate  to  the  end  of  all  study.  The  other 
departments  of  human  knowledge  contain  but  the  faint  and 
broken  accents  of  nature ;  the  Holy  Scriptures  contain  the 
clear  voice  of  God  from  Heaven.  Hence  there  should  also  be 
this  order  in  the  human  knowable,  that  all  the  sciences  should 
be  subservient  to  the  study  of  God  in  the  Holy  Code. 

Man  should  study  the  different  sciences  with  the  view  of 
coming  closer  to  the  Creator  through  the  consideration  of  his 
works.  The  man,  then,  who  essays  to  interpret  the  word  of 
God,  should  bring  to  his  task  the  possession  of  vast  and  varied 
knowledge,  that  truth  may  beget  truth,  and  the  message  of 
the  Creator  may  be  received  in  its  fulness,  in  the  mind  made  re- 
ceptive by  careful  preparation.  The  student  of  Scripture 
takes  up  the  grandest  and  sublimest  system  of  philosophy,  the 
truest  and  best  system  of  ethics,  and  the  grand  basis  of  dog- 
matic truth.  The  human  mind  is  limited,  the  compass  of  its 
cognitions  is  never  vast,  and  it  would  be  presumption  in  it  to 
undertake  to  find  the  sense  of  the  Holy  Code  without  much 
laborious  preparation.  A  man  with  some  happy  faculty  of 
expression  may  treat  of  many  themes  of  human  knowledge 
without  great  mental  application.  He  may  be  able  to  spend  his 
time  in  visiting  and  social  converse,  and  yet  be  able  to  treat 
indifferently  well  the  aforesaid  themes ;  but  if  a  man  would 
draw  anything  more  than  pious  generalities  out  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, he  must  study. 

In  the  words  of  Jerome :  "  Agricolae,  caementarii,  fabri, 
metallorum  lignorumve  caesores,  lanarii  quoque  et  fullones, 
et  ceteri,  qui  variam  supellectilem  et  vilia  opuscula  fabricantur, 
absque  doctore,  esse  non  possunt  quod  cupiunt.  Quod  medi- 
corum  est, 

Promittunt  medici ;  tractant  fabrilia  fabri. 

Sola  Scripturarum  ars,  quam  sibi  omnes  passim  vindicant : 

Scribimus  indocti  doctique  poemata  passim. 

Hanc  garrula  anus,  hanc  delirus  senex,  banc  sophista  verbosus, 
hanc  universi  praesumunt,  lacerant,  docent,  antequam  discant. 
Alii  adducto  supercilio  grandia  verba  trutinantes  inter  mulier- 

KK 


678  BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS. 

culas  de  sacris  Uteris  philosophantur.  Alii  discunt,  proh  dolor, 
a  feminis,  quod  viros  doceant :  et  ne  parum  hoc  sit,  quadam 
facilitate  verborum,  imo  audacia  edisserunt  aliis,  quod  ipsi  non 

intelligunt Puerilia  sunt  haec  et  circulatorum  ludo  similia, 

docere  quod  ignores,  imo,  ut  cum  stomacho  loquar,  ne  hoc 
quidem  scire,  quod  nescias."  (St.  Hier.  ad  Paulin.  Ep.  53,6, 
7,  Migne,  P.  L.  22,  544.) 

The  student  of  Scripture  should  study  everything,  and 
order  the  fund  of  knowledge  thus  acquired  to  obtain  the 
greatest  of  all  acquisitions,  the  science  of  God. 

He  should  study  natural  science  to  see  the  design  of  the 
Creator  in  his  works,  and  the  evidences  of  his  wisdom  in 
Nature's  laws ;  and  also  to  defend  the  truths  of  God  against  the 
puny  and  inflated  sophists,  who  speak  in  the  name  of  science. 
He  should  study  philosophy  that  by  the  possession  of  the 
truths  of  one  order,  the  mind  may  expand  and  rise  by  the  right 
laws  from  one  order  of  truth  to  another,  in  its  upward  course 
towards  the  Infinite  Truth. 

He  should  study  the  languages,  for  the  resources  of  human 
thought  is  shut  up  in  the  different  languages  of  the  races  of 
man.  No  man  can  well  come  at  the  thought  of  the  world 
through  the  knowledge  of  any  one  tongue. 

He  should  study  the  tongues  in  which  the  Holy  men  of 
God  spoke,  for  the  fulness  and  the  clearness  of  the  thought 
remains  in  the  original  tongue  in  which  it  was  first  delivered. 
It  will  not  suffice  to  say :  Jerome  translated  the  Hebrew  for 
me,  and  as  I  can  not  equal  Jerome's  knowledge  of  Scripture,  I 
shall  desist  from  fruitless  toil.  Neither  Jerome  nor  any  other 
man,  put  into  the  translation  the  fulness  and  the  clearness  of 
the  original.  Only  he  who  draws  directly  from  the  original 
fount,  can  open  up  the  full  sense  of  the  Sacred  Text. 

He  should  study  dogmatic  theology,  that  he  may  be 
guided  by  the  analogy  of  faith  in  all  interpretations.  It  may 
be  safely  stated  that  no  man  ever  became  an  able  interpreter 
of  Scripture,  who  was  not  a  profound  dogmatic  theologian. 

He  should  study  archaeology,  that  he  may  know  the  cus- 
toms and  modes  of  life  of  ancient  people ;  for  a  knowledge  of 
these  will  throw  light  on  certain  expressions  of  such  people. 

He  should  study  textual  criticism,  that  he  may  be  able  to 
judge  of  the  sense  of  various  readings,  and  intelligently  handle 
the  different  codices. 

Finally,  he  should  read  and  ponder  much  upon  the  Holy 
Code,  for  it  does  not  reveal  its  depths  of  truths  to  the  casual 
reader. 


BIBLICAL  HERMENEUTICS.  579 

Some  writers  at  this  point  formulate  rules  of  criticism.  I 
believe,  however,  that  the  science  is  not  promoted  by  these 
rules.  A  mind  well  stored  with  knowledge,  acting  with  judg- 
ment and  prudence,  and  with  a  teachableness  of  heart  will 
naturally  move  in  the  lines  which  these  rules  endeavor  to 
systematize. 

The  use  of  these  data  is  ordered  to  find  the  Sense  OF 
Scripture. 

When  we  speak  of  the  sense  of  a  writing,  we  mean  not  the 
mere  signification  of  the  words.  The  signification  of  a  word  is 
the  power  that  it  has  from  its  own  nature,  and  the  institution 
and  use  of  man  to  convey  a  determinate  idea.  Hence  one 
term  can  have  many  significations.  But  the  sense  of  a  word 
is  the  actual  value  that  the  term  has  in  a  particular  predica- 
tion ;  and  the  sense  in  a  right  ordered  proposition  can  be  but 
one. 

The  old  writers  divided  the  sense  of  Scripture  into  various 
species.  Many  of  these  species  serve  no  practical  purpose. 
They  arose  out  of  that  general  drift  of  the  ancients  to  seek 
always  something  mystic  in  the  Scriptures,  and  to  multiply 
divisions  in  every  science.  Setting  aside  then  the  systems  of 
the  ancients,  we  shall  found  our  classification  of  the  senses  of 
Scripture,  on  the  nature  of  the  text  itself. 

The  first  and  greatest  of  the  senses  of  Scripture  is  the 
Literal  Sense. 

The  literal  sense  is  that,  which  results  immediately  from 
the  ordinary  force  of  the  words,  as  when  I  say :  "  The  Word 
was  made  flesh."  This  is  sometimes  called  the  historical  sense. 
It  is  the  basic  sense  in  all  Scripture,  and  in  all  the  expressions 
of  the  creations  of  mind.  The  older  writers  included  under 
one  head  both  the  literal  and  the  metaphorical  sense.  We 
reject  this  mode  of  division,  and  place  as  a  distinct  species 
the  Metaphorical  Sense. 

The  metaphorical  sense  of  Scripture  is  a  deviation  from  the 
ordinary  application  of  words,  in  which  we  predicate  concepts 
of  objects,  not  proper  to  them  in  their  essential  nature,  but 
founded  in  some  wide  general  similarity.  Thus  we  speak  of 
the  "  arm  of  the  Lord  "  not  to  predicate  the  corporal  member 
of  God,  but  to  assert  of  him  the  power  of  action. 

We  include  under  the  heading  of  metaphorical  sense  of 
Scripture,  all  figurative  sense,  whether  it  consist  in  simile, 
parable,  personification,  allegory,  synecdoche,  metonymy, 
apostrophe,  irony,  hyperbole,  or  other  figure.  The  main  office 
of  figurative  speech  in  Scripture  is  to  heighten  the  force  of  the 


680  BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS. 

enunciation,  to  give  clearness  to  abstract  ideas,  and  to  express 
ideas  with  something  of  the  fulness  and  vividness  of  the  ob- 
jects of  sense. 

The  state  of  a  man  perplexed  by  many  thoughts,  could 
scarcely  be  better  expressed  than  by  saying : 

"  I  scarcely  understand  my  own  intent ; 

But  silkworm  like,  so  long  within  have  wrought, 

That  I  am  lost  in  my  own  web  of  thought." 

Some  of  the  figures  of  the  Scripture  are  very  bold.  It  is  a 
bold  figure  to  represent  God  as  walking  in  the  Garden  of  Eden, 
or  to  bid  the  Apostles  salute  no  man  in  the  way,  or  to  bid  a 
man  hate  his  father  and  mother,  brother  and  sister. 

The  allegory  is  a  common  form  of  Scriptural  figure.  It  is 
a  form  of  expression  in  which  the  real  subject  is  not  men- 
tioned but  described  by  a  consistent,  intelligible  statement,  and 
the  subject  is  left  to  be  inferred  by  the  aptly  suggestive  like- 
ness.    A  fine  allegory  is  in  Isaiah  V.  i — 2. 

"  My  beloved  hath  a  vineyard  in  a  very  fruitful  hill ;  and  he 
fenced  it,  and  gathered  out  the  stones  thereof,  and  planted  it 
with  the  choicest  vine,  and  built  a  tower  in  the  midst  of  it, 
and  also  made  a  wine-press  therein  ;  and  he  looked  that  it 
should  bring  forth  grapes,  and  it  brought  forth  wild  grapes." 

The  parable  was  much  used  by  the  Lord.  This  figure  of 
speech  is  properly  a  species  of  allegory,  in  which  a  religious 
truth  is  exhibited  by  means  of  facts  from  nature  and  human 
life.  The  statements  are  not  historically  true,  but  are  offered 
as  a  means  of  conveying  a  higher  general  truth.  But  the  pro- 
positions are  always  true  to  nature ;  the  laws  of  the  nature  of 
the  different  beings  introduced,  are  strictly  observed,  and  the 
events  are  such  as  might  have  taken  place.  The  Prodigal 
Son,  The  Sower,  The  Ten  Virgins,  Lazarus  and  Dives,  are 
good  examples  of  this  form  of  expression. 

The  knowledge  of  the  sense  of  Scripture,  has  been  much 
obscured  by  the  addition  of  what  is  called  the  sensus  conse- 
quens. 

Such  is  the  nature  of  the  human  mind,  that  it  evolves  truth 
from  truth  by  logical  process.  The  truths  which  are  by  logi- 
cal deduction  drawn  from  other  truths  of  Scripture,  are  by 
some  writers  classed  under  the  sensus  consequens.  Since  God 
endowed  man  with  the  reasoning  faculty,  it  is  natural  and 
right  for  him  to  proceed  in  syllogistic  process  from  truth  to 
truth.  And  if  the  fundamental  position  be  the  sense  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  and  the  logical  process  be  legitimate,  the  conclu- 
sion will  be  equally  the  sense  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  reducible 


BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS.  581 

to  the  species  of  the  fundamental  position.  While,  therefore, 
we  justify  the  process,  we  see  no  need  of  multiplying  entia  by 
placing  this  division  of  the  sense  of  Scripture. 

As  the  infinite  knowledge  of  God  comprehends  all  future 
things  and  events,  he  alone  can  order  a  being  or  event  to  pre- 
figure some  future  being  or  event.  This  prefiguring  of  future 
beings,  actions,  and  events  is  called  the  typical  or  spiritual 
sense  of  Scripture.  It  is  evident  that  it  can  only  be  properly 
verified  in  inspired  writings,  for  no  other  being  can  thus  com- 
prehend and  describe  the  future. 

The  typical  sense  is  therefore  verified  when  some  being, 
action,  or  event  which  has  its  own  proper  mode  of  being,  is 
taken  to  signify  some  future  ens.  Therefore  the  typical  sense 
is  founded  upon  the  literal  sense.  It  leaves  to  the  sentence 
its  proper  literal  sense,  and  is  formed  upon  it  by  applying  the 
great  leading  concept  of  the  present  reality  to  future  being. 
It  is  evident  that  it  differs  from  the  metaphorical  sense,  though 
it  comes  close  to  allegory.  But  it  is  distinguishable  from 
allegory  in  this,  that  it  imports  as  its  basis  some  real  existing 
being,  whereas  allegory  is  the  application  of  an  imaginary  ens 
to  signify  present  or  future  truth.  Thus  the  ten  virgins  can 
not  be  called  a  type  of  the  kingdom  of  Heaven,  but  an  allegor- 
ical description  of  the  different  religious  conditions  of  human 
life,  in  its  journey  towards  eternity. 

The  typical  sense  is  also  different  in  nature  from  the  sense 
of  the  symbolic  actions  of  prophetic  vision.  The  Vision  of 
Ezechiel,  I.  4 — 28,  for  example,  was  not  a  type  of  the  Almighty, 
but  a  symbol  of  some  of  his  attributes.  Thus  also  the  Woman 
seen  by  John  in  the  Apocalypse,  XII.,  is  not  a  type  of  the 
Church,  but  the  life  of  the  militant  Church  there  portrayed 
by  symbolic  vision. 

The  type  is  properly  built  on  some  ens  in  rerum  natura; 
the  symbol  is  only  a  creation  of  the  mind. 

Usage  has  determined  that  the  ens  adumbrating  the  future 
verity  should  be  called  the  type,  while  the  future  verity  thus 
prefigured  is  called  the  ANTITYPE. 

The  old  writers  here  again  induce  useless  divisions,  dividing 
types  into  prophetic,  which  relate  to  Christ,  anagogic  which 
regard  man's  supernatural  destiny,  and  tropologic,  which  con- 
tain laws  of  morality.     These  divisions  serve  no  useful  purpose. 

The  existence  of  types  in  the  Scripture  is  self-evident  from 
the  reading  of  the  Holy  Books.  Adam  is  called  a  type  of 
Christ,  TUTTo?  Toi  /LteWovTo?,  Rom.  V.  14;  the  sacrifice  of 
Melchisedech  is  a  type  of  the  Eucharist ;  Sara  and   Hagar  are 


682  BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS. 

types  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  Gal.  IV.  24;  the 
Paschal  Lamb  was  a  type  of  the  Crucifixion,  Exod.  XII.  46, 
compared  with  Jo.  XIX.  36;  the  Brazen  Serpent  was  a  type  of 
the  Vicarious  Atonement,  Num.  XXI.  9 ;  the  Manna  was  a 
type  of  the  Eucharist,  Exod.  XVI.  15,  compared  with  Jo.  VI. 
49 — 50;  Israel  in  the  Exodus  was  a  type  of  Christianity, 
ravra  he  TxrmKo.'i  avve^aivev  eK€ivoL<i^  I.  Cor.  X.  Ii.  Such  evi- 
dent proofs  render  the  existence  of  the  typical  sense  as  well 
founded  as  the  existence  of  inspiration. 

The  sense  of  every  proposition  of  Scripture  must  be  found 
in  these  three  classes.  It  is  evident  also  that  the  typical  sense 
presupposes  the  literal  sense  and  is  based  upon  it.  Therefore 
in  the  typical  sentences  of  the  Bible  there  will  be  two  senses, 
though  not  of  the  same  order.  This  is  the  only  case  where 
there  is  more  than  one  sense  in  a  proposition  of  the  Holy 
Text.  Those  old  writers  who  defended  a  multiplex  sense  of 
Scripture  confused  issues,  so  that  their  opinions  are  not  con- 
vincing. It  is  the  nature  of  human  speech  that  there  be  but 
one  literal  sense  in  a  proposition,  and  the  inspired  writers  act- 
ing under  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  are  not  to  be 
supposed  to  have  changed  the  nature  of  human  discourse.  In 
fact  the  understanding  of  the  Scriptures  would  be  much  im- 
peded, if  more  than  one  literal  sense  was  contained  in  them, 
for  one,  after  receiving  one  certain  literal  sense,  would  be  ever 
uncertain  whether  there  were  not  others  yet  to  be  explored. 

The  comprehensive  sense  of  prophetic  utterances  may 
seem  to  us  to  be  multiplex,  but  a  careful  examination  will 
show  that  what  was  thought  a  multiplex  sense,  was  simply  a 
fuller  comprehension  of  the  literal  sense.  Thus,  we  can  recon- 
cile Isaiah  LIII.  4,  with  St.  Matthew,  VIII.  17.  Moreover,  an 
agent  may,  notwithstanding  our  position,  unconsciously  utter 
an  inspired  prophecy,  while  giving  utterance  to  a  human  judg- 
ment with  its  own  proper  sense.  Thus  Caiphas  gave  judgment 
favoring  the  death  of  Jesus,  but  as  he  was  pontiff  of  that  year, 
his  words  contained  an  unconscious  prophecy  of  the  Redemp- 
tion of  humanity  by  the  death  of  Jesus.  But  there  is  only 
one  inspired  sense  here,  and  moreover,  Caiphas  can  not  be 
made  equal  to  the  inspired  writers. 

From  the  express  declarations  of  the  inspired  writers,  and 
from  the  nature  of  the  truths  themselves,  it  is  evident  that  the 
entire  Old  Testament  with  its  history  and  its  rites  is  a  type  of 
the  New.  Thus  Moses  and  Joshua  are  types  of  Christ,  the 
Ark  of  Noah,  a  type  of  the  Church,  the  old  sacrifices,  a  type  of 
the  Eucharist,  etc.,  but  it  is  absurd  to  seek   this  typology  in 


BIBLICAL  HERMENEUTICS.  683 

every  individual  proposition.  This  has  been  done  even  to  the 
extent  of  finding  a  typical  signification  in  the  snuffers  used  to 
remove  the  snuff  from  the  candles  in  the  temple.  The  vanity 
of  such  position  is  very  evident.  There  is  much  in  the  first 
Code  that  has  only  its  plain  historical  sense,  such  as,  for 
instance,  the  Decalogue. 

The  question  has  been  moved  by  some,  whether  there  are 
types  in  the  New  Testament.  This  question  admits  of  a 
definite  and  certain  answer. 

There  are  no  messianic  types  in  the  New  Dispensation  as 
there  were  in  the  Old,  which  was  but  the  shadow  of  the  per- 
fect covenant.  But  still,  as  the  Church  was  a  future  ens  in  the 
time  of  Christ,  there  were  typical  actions  in  his  life,  and  certain 
events  connected  with  his  first  coming,  are  typical  of  their 
counterparts  in  his  second  coming.  Thus  St.  Paul  finds  a 
typical  ratio  in  the  fact  that  Christ  suffered  death  outside  the 
gate  ;  the  bark  of  the  Apostles,  tossed  by  the  tempest,  is  a  type 
of  the  Church,  and  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  is  most  cer- 
tainly a  type  of  the  dissolution  of  the  world. 

Now  of  the  senses  of  Scripture,  the  greatest  and  most 
valuable  is  the  literal  sense.  This  should  be  first  sought  in 
every  passage  of  Scripture,  and  recourse  should  only  be  had  to 
the  metaphorical  sense,  when  the  literal  is  plainly  impossible. 
But  in  every  proposition  of  Scripture,  either  the  literal  or  meta- 
phorical sense  will  be  found.  Care  must  be  taken  not  to  re- 
ceive the  error  of  Origen,  who  defended  that  at  times  only  the 
typical  sense  was  intended.  The  typical  never  stands  alone, 
but  is  always  built  upon  the  literal.  The  Fathers  have  at  times 
extolled  the  typical  sense  above  the  literal,  on  the  assumption 
that  it  treated  of  higher  concepts.  This  is  erroneous.  The 
typical  sense  is  more  sublime  in  those  passages  in  which  it  is 
found  than  its  type,  but  it  is  not  more  sublime  than  the  literal 
sense  in  general.  The  typical  sense  of  the  passage  relating  to 
the  Paschal  Lamb  is  more  sublime  than  its  type,  but  it  is  not 
more  sublime  than  the  declaration  of  St.  John:  "The  Word 
was  made  flesh  and  dwelt  amongst  us,"  or  the  Beatitudes ;  and 
these  are  to  be  accepted  in  their  literal  sense.  Therefore, 
where  there  is  a  typical  sense  it  is  to  be  principally  sought,  be- 
cause it  was  in  such  passage  principally  intended  by  the  Holy 
Ghost ;  but  the  great  body  of  the  Scriptures  especially  of  the 
New  Testament  contain  their  truths  in  the  literal  sense.  The 
excessive  looking  wide  of  the  literal  sense  in  search  of  types,  is 
one  of  the  great  defects  of  pulpit  use  of  Holy  Scripture. 


584  BIBLICAL    HERMENEUTICS. 

Finally  the  typical  sense  of  any  passage  can  only  be  cer- 
tainly known,  by  some  authentic  declaration  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.  The  ordering  of  one  ens  to  signify  another  is  the 
work  of  God,  and  can  only  be  fully  known  to  us  through  some 
manifestation  of  the  mind  of  God.  Therefore,  we  can  only 
found  things  which  are  of  faith  on  those  types,  whose  typical 
signification  has  been  opened  up  to  us  by  some  inspired 
writer.  When  this  is  done,  it  is  evident  that  the  sense  is  as 
certain  as  the  literal  sense. 

In  the  liturgical  offices  of  the  Church,  and  in  the  writings 
of  the  Fathers,  often  a  passage  of  Scripture  is  applied  to  an 
object,  which  was  not  in  the  mind  of  the  inspired  writer,  nor 
comprehended  in  the  scope  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  inspired 
writing.  This  is  called  the  accommodated  sense.  It  is  based 
upon  some  resemblance  between  the  two  themes. 

To  speak  properly,  it  is  not  a  sense  of  Scripture,  but  the 
adaptation  of  the  sense  of  Scripture  to  another  theme  of  simi- 
lar nature.  This  accommodation  takes  place  in  two  different 
ways.  The  first  species  occurs  where  the  passage  retains  its 
real  signification,  but  is  extended  to  another  theme,  which  is 
analogous  in  nature  and  circumstances.  Thus  a  man  who 
falls  in  temptation  may  say:  "  Serpens  decepit  me."  Thus, 
the  Breviary  applies  to  the  Holy  Pontiffs,  what  was  said  by 
the  Siracida  of  Noah :  "  Inventus  est  Justus,  et  in  tempore 
iracundiae  factus  est  reconciliatio".  In  the  same  manner,  the 
Breviary  extends  to  Holy  Pontiffs,  what  was  said  by  him  of 
Moses :  "  Similem  fecit  ilium  in  gloria  Sanctorum  ";  and  of 
Aaron :  "  Statuit  ei  testamentum  aetemum." 

This  use  of  Scripture  is  legitimate  and  useful,  provided 
always  the  first  sense  is  not  obscured,  and  the  application  is 
justly  made,  but  it  is  never  to  be  taken  as  the  sense  of  Holy 
Writ ;  it  can  never  prove  a  dogma.  Even  the  material  words 
of  Holy  Scripture  possess  a  sort  of  divine  virtue.  And  when 
they  become  the  vehicles  of  even  human  thoughts,  they  are 
capable  of  moving  the  soul  of  man  to  piety. 

The  second  species  of  accommodation  is  founded  in  no  real 
similarity  in  nature  or  circumstances  of  the  two  themes,  but  in 
a  mere  ignorant  distortion  of  scriptural  words  to  express  some 
human  thought.  Thus,  when  Jahve  showed  visible  signs  of 
his  majesty  in  certain  places,  the  Psalmist  cried  out :  "  Deus 
mirabilis  in  Sanctis  suis  (in  Sanctuario  suo)."  "  O  God,  thou 
art  terrible  in  thy  holy  places."  It  is  not  uncommon  to  apply 
this  to  the  mysterious  ways  of  God  to  his  elect,  or  even  to  the 
idiosyncrasies  of  holy  people.      Again  in  Psalm  XVIII.  26, 


THE  INTERPRETATION  OF  SCRIPTURE.  585 

(Hebrew)  the  Psalmist  declares  the  action  of  God  towards 
man  to  be  fashioned  by  the  qualities  of  a  man's  own  life  :  "  Cum 
sancto  sanctus  eris,  et  cum  perverso  perverteris."  It  is  lam- 
entable to  hear  a  man  tear  this  text  to  tatters,  to  prove  the 
ill  effect  of  evil  associations. 

It  is  related  that  after  the  Duke  of  Montmorency  was  ex- 
ecuted by  the  order  of  Cardinal  Richelieu,  the  sister  of  the 
Duke,  passing  the  tomb  of  the  Cardinal,  directed  to  him  an 
apostrophe  in  the  words  of  Martha,  the  sister  of  Lazarus: 
"  Domine,  si  fuisses  hie,  frater  meus  non  fuisset  mortuus  ".  It 
was  much  in  vogue  in  the  sixteenth  century  to  apply  the  sacred 
words  to  profane  subjects. 

When  St.  Francis  de  Sales  lay  ill,  his  physician  in  com- 
pounding some  medicine  for  him,  addressed  him  thus :  "  Quod 
ego  facio,  tu  nescis  modo ;  scies  autem  postea."  Jo.  XIII.  7. 
St.  Francis  reprehended  him  saying :  "  You  profane  the 
Scripture  of  God  in  applying  it  to  profane  things.  The  Scrip- 
ture should  only  be  used  of  holy  themes,  and  with  profound 
respect."  So  great  was  the  abuse,  that  the  Council  of  Trent 
in  its  fourth  session  formally  forbade  that  the  Scripture  be 
applied  to  profane  subjects.  Of  course,  all  species  of  such 
accommodation  are  not  reprehensive  in  the  same  degree.  In 
fact  there  is  no  evil  in  an  occasional  adaptation  of  the  Holy 
Text  to  something  refined  and  pure,  even  though  it  be  not  of 
the  intent  of  the  inspired  writer.  Thus  one  who  had  been 
rescued  from  a  ruined  coal  mine,  in  speaking  of  his  supplica- 
tions to  Heaven,  could  say  without  disrespect  to  the  Scrip- 
ture :  "  De  profundis  clamavi  ad  te,  Domine".  One  can  in- 
veigh against  sinful  waste  in  the  words  of  Judas  Iscariot : 
"  Ut  quid  perditio  haec  ?  " 

Chapter  XXXIII. 
The  Interpretation  of  Scripture. 

The  interpretation  of  Scripture  may  be  divided  into 
authentic  and  SCIENTIFIC. 

The  interpretation  is  authentic  if  the  sense  of  some  writer 
be  enucleated  for  us,  by  some  adequate  authority.  Thus,  when 
a  subsequent  writer  explains  the  sense  of  existing  Holy  Scrip- 
ture such  interpretation  is  authentic.  In  equal  degree  is  the 
interpretation  authentic  when  the  Church  authoritatively  de- 
clares the  sense  of  any  passage. 

The  interpretation  is  scientific  when  it  is  based  on  human 
study  and  judgment.     This  interpretation  is  never  independent 


586  THE   INTERPRETATION   OF   SCRIPTURE. 

of  the  authority  of  the  Church,  and  must  be  conducted  by  the 
just  laws  that  she  has  enacted  to  regulate  such  province  of 
human  thought.  Only  a  few  passages  have  been  authentically 
interpreted ;  hence  the  great  body  of  the  Scripture  lies  open 
to  scientific  interpretation,  of  which  we  shall  now  speak  at 
some  length. 

In  regard  to  this  theme,  writers  give  a  complex  system  of 
rules  which  could  be  summed  up  in  this :  study  the  original 
languages,  compare  the  best  codices,  compare  the  old  versions, 
read  the  Scriptures  intelligently,  and  endeavor  to  take  the 
sense  from  the  Scripture,  not  to  bring  one  into  it. 

Parallel  passages  will  also  aid  us  to  find  the  sense  of  ob- 
scure places. 

"  When,  in  any  ordinary  composition,  a  passage  occurs  of 
doubtful  meaning  with  respect  to  the  sentiment  or  doctrine  it 
conveys,  the  obvious  course  of  proceeding  is,  to  examine  what 
the  author  himself  has  in  other  parts  of  his  work  delivered 
upon  the  same  subject ;  to  weigh  well  the  force  of  any  parti- 
cular expressions  he  is  accustomed  to  use;  and  to  inquire  what 
there  might  be  in  the  occasion  or  circumstances  under  which 
he  wrote,  tending  to  throw  further  light  upon  the  immediate 
object  he  had  in  view.  This  is  only  to  render  common  justice 
to  the  writer ;  it  is  necessary  both  for  the  discovery  of  his  real 
meaning,  and  to  secure  him  against  any  wanton  charge  of  error 
or  inconsistency.  Now,  if  this  may  justly  be  required  in  any 
ordinary  work  of  uninspired  composition,  how  much  more 
indispensable  must  it  be  when  we  sit  in  judgment  upon  the 
sacred  volume;  in  which  (if  we  acknowledge  its  divine 
original)  it  is  impossible  to  imagine  a  failure  either  in  judg- 
ment or  in  integrity." 

"  God  has  been  pleased,  in  sundry  portions  and  in  divers 
manners,  to  speak  unto  us  in  his  world  ;  but  in  all  the  books 
of  Scripture  we  may  trace  an  admirable  unity  of  design,  an 
intimate  connection  of  parts,  and  a  complete  harmony  of 
doctrines.  In  some  instances  the  same  truths  are  conveyed 
nearly  in  the  same  modes  of  expression ;  in  other  instances, 
the  same  sentiments  are  clothed  with  beautiful  varieties  of 
language.  While  we  are  interested  in  discovering  some  of 
the  indications  of  mental  diversity  among  the  sacred  writers, 
we  clearly  perceive  that  the  whole  volume  of  revelation  is 
distinguished  by  a  certain  characteristic  style  and  phraseology 
altogether  its  own,  and  which,  for  simplicity,  dignity,  energy, 
and  fulness,  must  be  allowed  to  have  no  parallel.  Now,  if 
there  be  in  the  various  parts   of   Scripture   such   important 


THE  INTERPRETATION   OF  SCRIPTURE.  587 

coincidences  of  sentiment,  of  language,  and  of  idiom,  it  is 
evident  that  we  proceed  on  just  and  rational  principles,  in 
comparing  together  passages  that  have  some  degree  of  resem- 
blance, and  in  applying  those,  the  meaning  of  which  is  clear, 
to  the  illustration  of  such  as  are  involved  in  some  degree  of 
obscurity." 

In  seeking  the  sense  of  Holy  Scripture,  we  must  be  ever 
mindful  that  the  Scriptures  are  the  word  of  God,  that  they 
contain  the  thoughts  of  a  being  whose  ways  are  not  our  ways, 
and  whose  thoughts  are  not  our  thoughts.  If  we  seek  to 
make  the  Holy  Text  agree  with  our  notions,  we  shall  shut  up 
the  sense  of  the  Scriptures  of  God.  We  should  seek  it  with 
the  same  temper  of  mind  in  which  it  was  written.  The  voice 
of  God  is  heard  through  the  Scriptures,  and  the  voice  of  God 
is  only  heard  by  docile  hearts. 

Hence,  we  can  not  subject  the  Holy  Books  to  the  laws  of 
hermeneutics  as  a  mere  literary  production.  Every  interpre- 
tation which  presupposes  the  possibility  of  error  in  the  inspired 
writer,  is  to  be  rejected.  The  inability  to  find  the  sense  of  a 
passage  must  not  be  attributed  to  the  error  of  the  writer,  but 
to  the  limitations  of  our  comprehension.  In  the  same  way  no 
real  contradiction  can  be  admitted  between  the  different 
writers,  or  between  the  different  statements  of  the  same  writer. 
The  seeming  contradictions  in  doctrinal  and  moral  parts 
result  from  the  dulness  of  our  own  minds.  Some  contradic- 
tions have  come  into  the  non-essential  parts  of  Scripture,  but 
these  are  not  attributable  to  the  authors,  but  to  the  defects  of 
the  agencies  through  which  they  have  been  transmitted  to  us. 

The  Council  of  Trent  in  its  famous  decree  of  the  fourth 
session,  "  with  a  view  to  restrain  the  petulance  of  human 
minds,  decreed :  That  no  one  relying  on  his  own  judgment,  in 
the  doctrinal  and  moral  parts  of  Scripture,  should  distort  the 
Holy  Scriptures  to  conform  to  his  opinions  against  the  sense 
which  our  Holy  Mother  the  Church  has  held  and  holds, 
whose  office  it  is  to  judge  of  the  true  sense  and  interpretation 
of  Holy  Scripture ;  and  that  no  one  shall  dare  interpret  the 
same  Holy  Scriptures  contrary  to  the  unanimous  consensus  of 
the  Fathers".  This  decree  was  again  promulgated  by  the 
Vatican  Council.  The  last  clause  relating  to  the  Fathers  does 
not  really  add  any  new  element  to  the  decree  ;  for  the  Fathers 
when  agreeing  on  a  doctrinal  or  moral  part  of  Scripture,  are 
always  at  one  with  the  Church.  This  consensus  needs  not  be 
mathematical,  but  only  moral ;  and  when  it  is  such,  it  is  an 
authentic  witness  of  what  the  Church  held  in  past  ages. 


688  JEWISH    INTERPRETATION. 

The  sense  of  some  texts  has  been  directly  defined  by  the 
Church.  It  was  defined  by  the  Council  of  Trent,  that  Paul 
spoke  of  Original  sin,  Rom.  V.  12.  (Cone.  Trid.  Sess.  V.  2,  4.) 
It  was  defined  in  the  same  session,  and  again  in  the  seventh 
session,  that  the  sense  of  the  text,  John,  III.  5,  establishes  the 
necessity  of  baptism  by  natural  water.  In  the  thirteenth 
session  it  is  established,  that  the  words  of  institution  of  the 
Blessed  Eucharist  prove  the  real  presence  of  Christ  in  the 
Host.  In  the  fourteenth  session  it  is  defined  that  the  words  of 
Christ  in  John  XX.  23  convey  the  power  of  binding  and  loos- 
ing sin ;  and  that  James  V.  11  promulgates  the  Sacrament  of 
Extreme  Unction. 

The  indirect  force  of  the  Church's  definitions  pervades  the 
whole  body  of  the  Scriptures.  In  condemning  heresies,  she 
shows  us  indirectly  what  is  the  sense  of  many  passages ;  and 
her  authentic  teaching  forms  a  general  norm  of  interpretation 
which  we  call  the  analogy  of  faith. 

We  may  define  the  analogy  of  faith  to  be  the  constant  and 
perpetual  harmony  of  Scripture  in  the  fundamental  points  of 
faith  and  practice,  deduced  from  those  passages,  in  which  they 
are  discussed  by  the  inspired  penman,  either  directly  or  ex- 
pressly, and  in  clear,  plain,  and  intelligible  language.  Or, 
more  briefly,  the  analogy  of  faith  may  be  defined  to  be  that 
proportion  which  the  doctrines  of  the  Gospel  bear  to  each  other ^ 
or,  the  close  connection  between  the  truths  of  Revealed  Religion. 

The  analogy  of  faith  is  an  expression  borrowed  from  Saint 
Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  (xii.  6.)  where  he  exhorts  those 
who  prophesy  in  the  church  (that  is,  those  who  exercise  the 
office  of  authoritatively  expounding  the  Scriptures),  to  prophesy 
according  to  the  analogy  of  faith. 

If  we  come  to  the  Scriptures  with  any  pre-conceived 
opinions,  and  are  more  desirous  to  put  that  sense  upon  the 
text  which  coincides  with  our  own  sentiments  rather  than  the 
truth,  it  then  becomes  the  analogy  of  our  faith  rather  than 
that  of  the  whole  system  of  God's  truths. 

Chapter  XXXIV. 
Jewish  Interpretation. 
Through  defect  of  documents,  we  know  nothing  of  the  exe- 
getical  systems  of  the  Jews  before  the  time  of  Christ. 

Flavius  Josephus  declares  (War  I.  5,  2.)  that  the  Pharisees 
interpret  the  Law  accurately.  We  can  only  come  at  a  know- 
ledge of  their  system  through  the  Talmud,  which  reflects  the 
Jewish  thought  of  the  early  ages. 


JEWISH  INTERPRETATION.  589 

The  Talmud  is  a  composite  form  of  the    Mishna  and  the 

Gemara.     The  Mishna,  from   H^^'/  has  the  radical  significa- 

T  : 
tion  of  Deuterosis,  a  repetition  of  the  Law,  it  being  a  repetition 
and  explanation  of  the  Law.  In  the  Mishna  itself  we  read : — 
"  Why  is  it  called  the  Mishna?  Because  it  is  the  second  Law. 
For  the  first  Law  which  Israel  received  on  Sinai,  is  the  written 
Law.  But  Moses  received  the  Mishna  from  the  mouth  of  the 
Almighty  the  second  time,  and  it  is  the  oral  Law.  It  is  called 
Mishna  because  it  is  second  to  the  first  Law."  It  is  certain 
that  the  Mosaic  origin  of  the  Mishna  is  a  fable.  It  is  simply 
a  collection  of  the  opinions  and  legal  decisions  of  the  ancient 
Rabbis.  Chief  among  those  who  collected  the  data  of  the 
Mishna,  was  Rabbi  Jehuda  Hakkadosh,  or  the  Holy,  born 
about  the  middle  of  the  second  century.  The  Mishna  summed 
up  all  previous  rabbinical  labors,  and  moulded  all  the  sub- 
sequent philosophy  and  theology  of  Judaism.  Rabbinic  inter- 
pretation is  called  by  the  generic  term  of  Ci^**11D,  Midrash 
from  Ci^lH/  to  enquire.  These  Midrashim  are  of  two  kinds, 
the  Haggadah,  (1*12(1  from  U^  to  narrate,  was  a  free  exposi- 

T  T-  -T 

tion  inclining  to  allegory  and  mysticism,  and  generally  aimed 
to  console  the  saddened  spirit.  This  was  preferred  by  the 
Jews  in  the  dreadful  calamities  which  befell  them.  The  other 
species  is  JlD/fl^  Halakah,  from  TITTl  to  proceed.     This  in- 

terpretation  keeps  more  strictly  to  the  traditional  acceptation 
of  the  Law. 

"  These  traditional  ordinances,  as  already  stated,  bear  the 
general  name  of  the  Halakahy  as  indicating  alike  the  way  in 
which  the  fathers  had  walked,  and  that  which  their  children 
were  bound  to  follow.  These  Halakoth  were  either  simply 
the  laws  laid  down  in  Scripture ;  or  else  derived  from,  or  traced 
to  it  by  some  ingenious  and  artificial  method  of  exegesis  ;  or 
added  to  it,  by  way  of  amplification  and  for  safety's  sake ;  or 
finally,  legalized  customs.  They  provided  for  every  possible 
and  impossible  case,  entered  into  every  detail  of  private, 
family,  and  public  life ;  and  with  iron  logic,  unbending  rigour, 
and  most  minute  analysis  pursued  and  dominated  man,  turn 
whither  he  might,  laying  on  him  a  yoke  which  was  truly 
unbearable.  The  return  which  it  offered  was  the  pleasure  and 
distinction  of  knowledge,  the  acquisition  of  righteousness, 
and  the  final  attainment  of  rewards. 


590  JEWISH    INTERPRETATION. 

The  Halakah  indicated  with  the  most  minute  and  painful 
punctiliousness  every  legal  ordinance  as  to  outward  obser- 
vances, and  it  explained  every  bearing  of  the  Law  of  Moses. 

Altogether,  the  Mishna  comprises  six  *  Orders  '  {Sedarim), 
each  devoted  to  a  special  class  of  subjects.  The  first  '  Order  ' 
{Zeraim,  '  seeds ')  begins  with  the  ordinances  concerning  '  bene- 
dictions,' or  the  time,  mode,  manner,  and  character  of  the 
prayers  prescribed.  It  then  goes  on  to  detail  what  may  be 
called  the  religio-agrarian  laws  (such  as  tithing,  Sabbatical 
years,  first  fruits,  &c.).  The  second  '  Order '  {Moed,  *  festive 
time ')  discusses  all  connected  with  the  Sabbath  observance 
and  the  other  festivals.  The  third  '  Order '  {Nashim,  '  women') 
treats  of  all  that  concerns  betrothal,  marriage  and  divorce,  but 
also  includes  a  tractate  on  the  Nasirate.  The  fourth  *  Order  * 
{Nezikim,  'damages')  contains  the  civil  and  criminal  law. 
Characteristically,  it  includes  all  the  ordinances  concerning 
idol- worship  (in  the  tractate  Abodah  Zarah)  and  'the  sayings 
of  the  Fathers' (^(^^/^).  The  fifth  '  Order  '  {Kodashim,  'holy 
things ')  treats  of  the  various  classes  of  sacrifices,  oflferings,  and 
things  dedicated  to  God,  and  of  all  questions  which  can  be 
grouped  under  'sacred  things'  (such  as  the  redemption,  ex- 
change, or  alienation  of  what  had  been  dedicated  to  God.)  It 
also  includes  the  laws  concerning  the  daily  morning  and  evening 
SQr\icQ  {Tamid),  and  a  description  of  the  structure  and  arrange- 
ments of  the  Temple  {Middoth,  '  the  measurements').  Finally, 
the  sixth  'Order'  {Toharoth,  'cleannesses')  gives  every  ordi- 
nance connected  with  the  questions  of  '  clean  and  unclean,' 
alike  as  regards  human  beings,  animals,  and  inanimate  things. 

These  '  Orders '  are  divided  into  tractates  {Massiktoth, 
Massektiyoth,  '  textures,  webs '),  of  which  there  are  sixty-three 
(or  else  sixty-two)  in  all.  These  tractates  are  again  subdivided 
into  chapters,  ^Perakin^—m  all  525,  which  severally  consist 
of  a  certain  number  of  verses,  or  Mishnas  {Mishnayoth,  in  all 
4,187).  Considering  the  variety  and  complexity  of  the  sub- 
jects treated,  the  Mishna  is  arranged  with  remarkable  logical 
perspicuity.  The  language  is  Hebrew,  though  of  course  not 
that  of  the  Old  Testament.  The  words  rendered  necessary  by 
the  new  circumstances  are  chiefly  derived  from  the  Greek,  the 
Syriac,  and  the  Latin,  with  Hebrew  terminations.  But  all 
connected  with  social  intercourse,  or  ordinary  life  (such  as 
contracts),  is  written,  not  in  Hebrew,  but  in  Aramaean,  as  the 
language  of  the  people. 


JEWISH   INTERPRETATION.  591 

But  the  traditional  law  embodied  other  materials  than  the 
Halakoth  collected  in  the  Mishna.  Some  that  had  not  been 
recorded  there,  found  a  place  in  the  works  of  certain  Rabbis, 
or  were  derived  from  their  schools.  These  are  called  Boraithas 
— that  is,  traditions  external  to  the  Mishna.  Finally,  there 
were  '  additions '  (or  Tosephtoth),  dating  after  the  completion 
of  the  Mishna,  but  probably  not  later  than  the  third  century 
of  our  era.  Such  additions  are  added  to  fifty-two  out  of 
the  sixty-three  Mishnic  tractates.  When  speaking  of  the 
Halakah  as  distinguished  from  the  Haggadah,  we  must  not, 
however,  suppose  that  the  latter  could  be  entirely  separated 
from  it.  In  point  of  fact,  one  whole  tractate  in  the  Mishna 
(Aboth :  The  Sayings  of  the  '  Fathers  ')  is  entirely  Haggadah; 
a  second  {Middoth;  the  '  Measurements  of  the  Temple ')  has 
Halakah  in  only  fourteen  places ;  while  in  the  rest  of  the 
tractates  Haggadah  occurs  in  not  fewer  than  207  places.  Only 
thirteen  out  of  the  sixty-three  tractates  of  the  Mishna  are 
entirely  free  from  Haggadah. 

In  course  of  time  the  discussions,  illustrations,  explana- 
tions, and  additions  to  which  the  Mishna  gave  rise,  whether 
in  its  application,  or  in  the  Academies  of  the  Rabbis,  were 
authoritatively  collected  and  edited  in  what  are  known  as  the 
two  Talmuds  or  Gemaras.  If  we  imagine  something  combin- 
ing law  reports,  a  Rabbinical  *  Hansard,'  and  notes  of  a  theo- 
logical debating  club — all  thoroughly  Oriental,  full  of  di- 
gressions, anecdotes,  quaint  sayings,  fancies,  and  legends,  and 
too  often  of  what,  from  its  profanity,  superstition,  and  even 
obscenity,  could  scarcely  be  quoted,  we  may  form  some  general 
idea  of  what  the  Talmud  is.  The  oldest  of  these  two  Talmuds 
dates  from  about  the  close  of  the  fourth  century  of  our  era. 
It  is  the  product  of  the  Palestinian  Academies,  and  hence 
called  the  Jerusalem  Talmud.  The  second  is  about  a  century 
younger,  and  the  outcome  of  the  Babylonian  schools,  hence 
called  the  Babylon  (afterwards  also  'our')  Talmud.  We  do 
not  possess  either  of  these  works  complete.  The  most 
defective  is  the  Jerusalem  Talmud,  which  is  also  much  briefer, 
and  contains  far  fewer  discussions  than  that  of  Babylon.  The 
Babylon  Talmud,  which  in  its  present  form  extends  over 
thirty-six  out  of  the  sixty-three  tractates  of  the  Mishna,  is 
about  ten  or  eleven  times  the  size  of  the  Mishna,  and  more  than 
four  times  that  of  the  Jerusalem  Talmud.  It  occupies  (in  our 
editions),  with  marginal  commentations,  2,947  folio  leaves 
(pages  a  and  b).     Both  Talmuds  are  written  in  Aramaean  ;  the 


592  JEWISH    INTERPRETATION. 

one  in  its  western,  the  other  in  its  eastern  dialect,  and  in  both, 
the  Mishna  is  discussed  seriatim,  and  clause  by  clause." 

Opposed  to  the  Talmudists  were  the  Karaites,  a  sect 
formed  in  the  seventh  or  eighth  century.  They  rejected  the 
oral  traditions  of  the  Talmud,  and  while  seeking  the  literal 
sense,  rejected  the  literalism  of  the  Talmudists. 

The  EssENES  and  the  Alexandrian  Jews  adopted  a 
purely  mystical  interpretation  of  the  Scripture.  We  may 
judge  of  the  system  of  the  Alexandrians  from  their  represen- 
tative Philo.  According  to  him,  although  at  times  the  literal 
sense  must  be  developed  for  rude  minds  incapable  of  higher 
wisdom,  the  real  sense  of  the  Scripture  was  the  occult  under- 
standing of  the  symbols  which  were  contained  in  the  letter. 
Thus  Abraham  is  the  symbol  of  the  learning  of  virtue  ;  Isaac, 
of  the  acquisition  of  virtue ;  Jacob,  of  its  exercise.  Adam, 
is  a  symbol  of  man  in  his  rude  state;  Cain,  of  selfishness; 
Noah,  of  justice ;  Sara,  of  womanly  virtue ;  Rebecca,  of 
wisdom ;  Egypt,  is  a  symbol  of  the  body ;  the  dove,  of  the 
divine  wisdom,  etc.  He  compares  the  literal  sense  to  the 
body ;  the  allegorical,  to  the  soul,  and  in  many  places  rejects 
entirely  the  literal  sense,     His  work  is  worthless  in  exegesis. 

The  Cabalists  surpassed  Philo  in  mystic  jugglery.     The 

Cabalists  derive  their  name  from  p'2!0t  ^^  receive,  since  they 

••It 
fable  that  their  system  was  secretly  delivered  to  the  elders  on 

Sinai. 

Of  the  Cabalistic  theosophy,  we  shall  say  nothing.  We 
shall  only  briefly  indicate  some  of  their  artifices,  by  which  they 
find  foundation  for  their  vain  theories  and  beliefs. 

The  first  artifice  is  called  Gematria,  in  which  occult  senses 
are  drawn  from  the  text,  by  the  numerical  value  of  the  letters. 
For  example,  the  first  verse  of  Genesis  and  the  last  verse  of 
the  Hebrew  Bible,  H.  Chron.  XXXVI.  23.  contain  six  ^.  The 
letter  5»5  is  the  first  letter  of  Tp^,  a  thousand  ;  therefore,  the 

world  will  endure  six  thousand  years.     The  first  two  words  of 

Genesis  i^l^  rT^ti^t^lD  by  the  numerical  value  of  the  letters, 

T  T  •       ••  : 

make  1116;  the  name  number,  results  from  the  numerical  value 

of  the  phrase  t^*^^^  11^^*11  Ci^'5^'12/  "  »"  the  beginning  of  the 

T  :  •        TT  -  : 

year  it  was  created" :  therefore,  the  world  was  created  at  the 

autumnal  equinox,  which  is  the  beginning  of  the  Jewish  year. 

By  another  artifice,  they  accept   the  several  letters  of  a 

word  for  signs  of  complete  words,  and  thus  build  a  sentence 


JEWISH   INTERPRETATION.  693 

from  the  letters  of  one  word.  For  example  the  first  word  of 
Genesis  H'^Ci^'i^lD  is  by  this  method  made  to  signify  the  sen- 
tence :     '2  =  ^1'2f    he  created,  "^  =  ^^Olf    the    firmament, 

T  T  -    I  'T 

^  =  Y^^,  the  earth,  ^  =  U^t2^,  the  heavens,  ^  =  Qi,  the 

sea,  ^  =  Dlnn^  the  abyss :  he  (God)  created  the  firmament, 

the  earth,  the  heavens,  the  sea,  and  the  abyss. 

Some  Christians  have  resorted  to  Cabalistic  methods  to 
find  the  mystery  of  the  Trinity  in  the  same  term :     ^  =  |2/ 

the   Son,  *)  =  r\)1,  the  Spirit,    ^  =  ^^,    the  Father,  ^  = 

n^b\i;,  three,    ^  =  r\nr\\    unity,    n  =  riDa    perfect :    the 

T       :  T  •  :  T  T 

Son,  the  Spirit,  and  the  Father,  the  threefold  perfect  unity. 

By  adopting  just  the  reverse,  from  the  initial  letters  of 
HD^Dti^'n  IJ^Tl^i^"'  ^D/  who  shall  lead  us  to  Heaven  ?  they 
formed    H^'^D'  the  rabbinic  form  of  H /ID'  circumcision. 

T       •  T 

The  third  artifice,  called  Themurah  from  "^^^  to  change, 
is  founded  in  a  metathesis  of  the  letters. 

This  may  be  wrought  in  various  ways.  i. — The  transposi- 
tion may  be  wrought  of  the  letters  themselves  of  any  word,  so 

that  it  may  change  its  signification.     Thus  the  '']r*^7D/  "^7 

•  T  :   - 
angel,  of    Exod.    XXIII.    23,    by    the    Themurah    becomes 

7^^i^,  Michael,  the  name  of  the  angel. 

The  second  species  of  the  Themurah  consists  in  a  substitu- 
tion of  letters,  and  may  be  wrought  in  two  ways.  It  is  C^f^Hi^^ 
where  the  last  letter  of  the  alphabet  is  substituted  for  the  first 
letter,  J^  for  ^;  the  second  last  letter  for  the  second,  '^  for 
2,  hence  its  name  ^*12"n^^-  The  second  species  is  called 
D^7^/  and  differs  from  the  preceding  only  in  that  they 
divide  the  alphabet  in  two  equal  halves,  and  substitute  the 
first  letter  of  the  second  half,  7,  for  the  first  letter  of  the  first 
half,  ^,  and  so  through  both  halves.  Some  believe  that  the 
Massoretic  text  has  suffered  an  interpolation  from  the  Cabal- 
ists  in  Jer.  XXV.  26,  and  LI.  41,  where  we  read  TjC^'li^'Tl^D- 
No  such  kingdom  is  known  in  history.  Jerome  in 
forms  us  that  we  should  read  by  Athbasch  7^3,  and  he  be- 
lieves that  Jeremiah  with  design  concealed  the  real  name, 
leaving  it  to  the  Cabalists  to  interpret.  It  is  far  more  prob- 
able, that  if  7^^  should  be  read  there,  that  the  text  has  been 

corrupted  from  p;^^  to  T]^'^  by  the  Cabalists. 
LL  ' 


694  JEWISH    INTERPRETATION. 

The  most  famous  Cabalistic  treatise  is  the  Book  of  Sohar, 
/.  e.  the  Book  of  Splendor.  Though  the  Cabalists  assign  its  origin 
to  the  second  century,  it  is  most  probably  not  more  ancient 
than  the  thirteenth  century. 

Though  purporting  to  explain  the  Law,  it  is  simply  a  Cabal- 
istic treatise  on  their  occult  doctrines  concerning  God,  the 
Messiah,  the  Angels,  etc.  Two  minor  works  of  similar  argu- 
ment are  the  Books  Bahir,  and  Jezira. 

After  the  eleventh  century  of  our  era  a  new  school  of  scrip- 
tural interpretation  arose  among  the  Jews.  The  doctors  of 
Judaism  began  to  discard  the  old  fables,  and  to  seek  the  literal 
sense  of  the  Scripture.  Of  course,  as  they  refused  to  recognize 
Christ  as  the  Messiah,  they  could  not  come  at  the  full  sense  of 
the  Old  Testament.  But  still  their  labors  are  useful  to  us  in 
giving  us  a  fuller  knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  tongue.  The 
following  are  the  most  famous  among  these  late  Talmudists: 

Rabbi  Salomon  ben  Isaac,  frequently  called  Jarchi,  or 
Rashi,  was  born  at  Troyes  in  Champagne  in  1040.  He  com- 
mented the  entire  Scripture  and  the  Talmud.  He  obtained 
great  fame  among  the  Jews,  and  the  first  Hebrew  book  ever 
printed  was  his  commentary  on  the  Pentateuch.  His  hatred 
of  Christianity  is  evident  in  many  places  in  his  works.  His 
style  is  obscure,  and  he  has  received  many  of  the  fables  of  the 
early  Talmudists.     He  died  in  1105. 

2. — Rabbi  Abraham  ben  Meir  ben  Ezra,  commonly 
called  Abenezra,  was  born  at  Toledo,  in  Spain,  in  1093.  He 
distinguished  himself  in  philosophy,  astronomy,  medicine, 
poetry,  mathematics,  the  languages,  and  exegesis.  He  travelled 
much,  visited  the  principal  cities  of  Europe,  Egypt,  and  other 
parts  of  the  East.  He  died  in  1167,  on  his  way  from  Rhodes 
to  Rome. 

He  is  one  of  the  greatest  of  the  Talmudists.  He  com- 
mented the  entire  Old  Testament  except  Chronicles.  In  this 
commentary  he  seeks  the  literal  sense  of  the  text,  and  breaks 
away  from  the  old  fables.  He  was  infected  with  a  certain 
rationalistic  turn  of  mind,  and  was  most  inconstant  in  his 
opinions.  Though  his  commentary  on  the  Scriptures  is  free 
from  the  fables  of  the  Cabalists,  in  other  works  he  indulges 
his  genius  in  this  species  of  jugglery.  He  was  endowed  with 
prodigious  memory,  which  made  him  easy  master  of  the  Jewish 
thought  of  his  time. 

Rabbi  Moses  ben  Maimon,  commonly  called  Maimonides, 
and  sometimes  Rambam,  was  born  at  Cordova,  in  Spain,  in 
II 35.     Cordova  was  at  that  time  a  Mussulman  stronghold, 


JEWISH    INTERPRETATION.  595 

and  the  vernacular  tongue  of  Maimonides  was  Arabic.  He  is 
styled  Rabbi  Abram,  the  last  of  the  sages  as  regards  time,  and 
the  first  in  worth.  His  life  is  enveloped  in  a  web  of  fable. 
The  few  certain  data  attainable  are,  that  he  studied  medicine, 
and  made  such  progress  in  it,  that  he  was  made  court-physician 
to  Saladin  of  Egypt.  He  was  versed  in  the  Arabic  philos- 
ophy, and  in  mathematics,  but  his  greatest  claim  to  fame,  is 
founded  on  his  Talmudic  labors.  He  wrote  partly  in  Hebrew 
and  partly  in  Arabic.  His  greatest  work  is  his  Mishneh 
Thorah,  a  systematic  codification  of  the  whole  Jewish  Law,  as 
found  in  the  Bible,  the  Mishnah,  the  Talmud,  and  minor  books. 
The  Jews  have  held  this  book  in  great  esteem,  and  declare 
that  by  it  Maimonides  merits  a  place  next  to  Moses  the 
Lawgiver.  It  remains  a  great  source  of  rabbinic  learning,  even 
to  this  day.  Some  Jews  have  even  neglected  the  Talmud,  to 
concentrate  their  study  on  Rambam.  It  forms  a  sort  of 
tournament  for  all  later  Talmudists,  and  to  explain  a  difificult 
"  Rambam  ",  is  a  test  of  learning  with  the  Talmudists.  A 
MS.  of  the  work  is  in  the  library  of  Cambridge.  Various 
editions  have  been  printed  of  it ;  the  last  and  most  complete 
is  that  of  Leipsic  in  1862. 

The  most  important  of  Maimonides'  other  works  is  the 
Dalalatu  '1-Hairin  in  Arabic,  in  Hebrew  D'^DI^JH  HIID^ 
The  Guide  of  the  Perplexed. 

This  work  essays  to  explain  the  difTficult  passages  of  the 
Bible.  Maimonides  was  conversant  with  Aristotle,  and  made 
much  use  of  his  philosophy  in  this  work.  The  work  is  a  curi- 
ous medley  of  symbolism,  mysticism,  Greek  philosophy,  and 
rationalism.  Maimonides  left  several  other  works,  which  merit 
no  special  mention  here.     He  died  at  Cairo  in  1204. 

The  next  great  Talmudist  of  the  middle  ages  is  Rabbi 
David  Kimchi,  sometimes  called  Radak.  He  was  born  at 
Narbonne  after  11 55,  and  died  probably  in  the  same  city  about 
1235.  His  father  Rabbi  Yoseph,  or  his  grandfather  Rabbi 
Isaac  (Yishak)  Ibn  Kimchi,  had  immigrated  into  Provence  from 
Spain,  whence  Arab  fanaticism  had  compelled  the  Jews  to  flee. 
In  Provence  the  family  took  the  Gentile  surname  of  Petit. 
Rabbi  David  lost  his  father  (who  was  himself  a  grammarian, 
Bible  commentator,  and  poet  of  no  mean  order)  very  early ; 
but  his  elder  and  only  brother.  Rabbi  Mosheh  (a  fair  scholar, 
but  famous  chiefly  through  his  younger  brother),  was  his  prin- 
cipal oral  teacher.  The  valuable  literary  treasures  of  his 
father,  however,  falling  into  his  hands,  Radak  grew  strong  by 
studying  them,  and,  as  we  know,   eclipsed  them  completely, 


596  JEWISH   INTERPRETATION. 

although  he  lacked  his  father's  originality.  But,  if  Rabbi 
David  lacked  originality,  he  had  abundance  of  instinct  for 
finding  out  the  best  in  the  works  of  his  predecessors,  and 
abundance  of  genius  for  digesting  and  assimilating  it  till  it  be- 
came his  own  in  a  peculiar  way.  Although  preceded  by 
Hayyuj,  Ibn  Janah,  and  others,  and  succeeded  by  Abraham 
de  Balmes,  Elias  Levita,  and  others,  Kimchi  has  maintained 
the  position  of  the  greatest  Jewish  grammarian  and  lexico- 
grapher. And,  although  much  inferior  as  a  Biblical  scholar 
and  talmudist  to  Rashi,  and  as  a  critic  and  philosopher  to 
Abraham  Ibn  Ezra,  he  has  outstripped  both  in  the  eyes,  not 
only  of  the  Christians,  but  to  some  extent  even  of  the  Jews, 
and  thus  reigned  supreme  for  more  than  half  a  millennium,  as 
a  commentator  on  the  Bible.  From  the  fact  that  he  was 
master  of  the  Targums  and  Haggadoth  as  few  before  or  after 
him,  that  he  had  Hebrew,  Arabic,  and  Greek  philosophy  at  his 
fingers'  ends,  and  that  he  was  endowed  with  a  truly  poetical 
soul,  the  mystery  is  explained  how  the  merely  reproductive 
scholar  could  cause  original  scholars  of  the  highest  eminence, 
but  who  were  one-sided,  to  be  all  but  forgotten.  Not  only 
have  his  works,  in  whatever  field  they  are  to  be  found,  been 
printed  and  reprinted,  but  the  most  important  of  them  are 
translated  into  Latin,  into  Judaeo-German,  and  even  into 
English. 

Kimchi  has  commented  all  the  Old  Testament,  except  the 
Pentateuch,  and  of  that  he  commented  the  greater  part  of 
Genesis.  His  most  valuable  contribution  to  Hebrew  literature 
is  his  Grammar  and  Lexicon.  All  subsequent  Hebrew  lexico- 
graphers have  drawn  from  his  D''Ci^'n2^  1DD/  the  Book  of 

•    T  T        V  •• 
Roots,     Of  course  comparative  philology  has  amplified  these 

data,  but  it  has  by  no  means  superseded  the  work  of  this 
Rabbi.     He  died  at  Narbonne  about  1235. 

Isaac  ben  Juda  Abarbanel,  or  Abravanel,  was  born  at 
Lisbon  in  1437.  His  family  was  opulent,  and  he  received  a 
liberal  education.  He  entered  the  political  career,  and  became 
Minister  of  Finance  to  Alphonsus  V.  of  Portugal,  and  after- 
wards to  Ferdinand  the  Catholic  of  Castile.  A  decree  of  ex- 
pulsion in  1492  forced  him  to  leave  Spain,  and  he  withdrew  to 
Naples,  where  he  occupied  an  eminent  post  at  the  Court  of 
Ferdinand  I.  and  his  successor  Alphonsus  II.  At  the  French 
invasion,  he  fled  to  Sicily,  and  finally  fixed  his  domicile  at 
Venice,  where  he  died  in  1508. 


JEWISH   INTERPRETATION.  597 

During  his  wanderings,  he  composed  numerous  works  treat- 
ing of  Holy  Scripture.  The  principal  works  are  Commentaries 
on  Deuteronomy,  Josue,  Judges,  Kings,  on  the  other  four 
books  of  the  Law,  on  Daniel,  Isaiah,  on  the  other  Prophets, 
and  two  Dissertations  on  the  Messiah.  He  has  also  other 
treatises  on  special  passages  of  Holy  Scripture.  Richard 
Simon  regards  him  as  the  most  useful  of  the  Rabbis,  and 
makes  him  equal  in  Hebrew  to  Cicero  in  Latin.  This  is  ex- 
cessive praise.  Like  all  his  class,  he  hated  the  Christians,  and 
gives  evidence  of  this  hatred  in  his  use  of  Scripture.  At  times 
he  is  more  of  a  rhetorician  than  an  exegete.  Long  digressions 
are  often  found  in  his  works,  made  up  chiefly  of  dry,  stupid 
subtilties,  and  attacks  on  Christianity. 

Other  Jewish  doctors  of  minor  note  are  R.  Levi  ben 
Gerson,  R.  Elias  Levita,  R.  Salomon  ben  Melech,  R.  Moses 
Nachmanides,  called  Ramban,  R.  Chajim,  R.  Jacob  ben 
Ruben,  R.  Aaron  ben  Joseph,  R.  Aaron  ben  Elia,  R.  Abra- 
ham de  Balmes  ben  Meir,  R.  Abraham  Hal^vi,  and  Abraham 
Usque. 

It  is  usual  for  writers  on  Scriptural  Introduction  to  place 
at  the  end  of  their  works,  a  list  of  the  principal  exegetes  of  all 
ages.  We  refrain  from  this,  lest  we  should  make  the  present 
volume  too  bulky.  Brief  biographical  notes  have  been  placed  at 
proper  places  through  the  work,  so  that  the  reader  who  has 
reached  this  point  will  scarcely  need  such  a  conspectus  of 
writers. 

And  thus  we  terminate  our  present  work,  feeling  with  the 
Maccabean  historian,  that,  if  we  have  written  well,  we  have 
achieved  our  purpose  ;  but,  if  poorly,  it  must  be  pardoned  us, 
for  it  was  the  best  that  we  could  do. 

The  End  of  the  General  Introduction. 


APPENDIX. 


The  Origin  of  Alphabetical  Writing. 

We  designate  by  Alphabet  the  series  of  characters  of  the 
different  peoples,  which  represent  the  sounds  and  articulations 
of  their  language. 

The  first  representations  of  thought  by  characters  were 
ideographic  hieroglyphics,  in  which  the  pictures  of  animals  or 
other  objects  of  nature  or  of  human  industry  were  symbols  of 
ideas,  without  any  of  the  connecting  links  of  language.  The 
written  language  of  the  Indians  of  North  America  was  largely 
ideographic.  This  mode  of  representing  thought  was  very 
imperfect.  It  could  represent  only  a  limited  number  of  ideas, 
and  that  by  great  labor  and  much  inexactness.  It  was  limited 
to  the  material  order  of  things ;  it  could  not  represent  an  ab- 
stract idea,  nor  could  it  join  thought  to  thought  in  logical 
sequence.  The  imperfection  of  this  mode  of  writing  gradually 
moved  the  inventive  mind  of  man  to  improve  it,  so  that  the 
pictures  of  similar  objects  should  stand  as  conventional  signs 
of  the  different  sounds  of  the  voice,  and  thus  the  ideographic 
evolved  into  the  phonetic.  In  the  Assyrian  cuneiform  writing, 
the  conventional  signs  were  taken  to  represent  syllables ;  they 
did  not  carry  the  analysis  of  the  voice  further.  But  the 
Egyptians  analyzed  the  voice  into  its  radical  sounds,  and  in- 
vented symbols  for  all.  This  mode  of  writing  existed  with 
the  Egyptians  more  than  3000  years  before  our  era.  It  was  of 
three  kinds.  Hieroglyphic,  Hieratic  and  Demotic. 

The  Hieroglyphic  proper  represented  the  sound  by  the 
correct  outlines  of  some  object,  in  whose  name  the  initial 
sound  corresponded  to  the  sound  of  which  it  was  to  be  a 
symbol.  The  Eagle,  whose  initial  letter  is  A  in  Egyptian, 
was  a  symbol  for  the  letter  A. 

The  Hieratic  mode  of  writing,  employed  for  state  papers, 
differed  from  the  Hieroglyphic  only  inasmuch  as  the  outlines  of 
the  objects  were  not  observed  with  such  fidelity,  but  were 
simplified  to  accelerate  the  writing. 

The  Demotic  is  a  further  abbreviation  and  simplification  of 
the  Hieratic,  made  use  of  by  the  common  people.  The  Hiero- 
glyphic proper  appears  on  the  monuments ;  the  other  two  in 
papyrus  MSS. 


APPENDIX.  599 

Together  with  these  phonetic  symbols  they  retained  certain 
ideographic  signs,  and  others  that  represented  syllables. 

The  Egyptian  hieroglyphics  by  no  means  constituted  a 
perfect  system.  They  were  rather  a  confused  medley  of  diffe- 
rent kinds  of  signs.  The  Phenicians  came  upon  this  chaos  of 
language  symbols,  and  catching  the  idea  of  the  Egyptians, 
they  eliminated  what  was  useless,  and  built  upon  the  original 
idea  the  alphabet  properly  so  called : 

' '  Phcenices  primi,  f amse  si  creditur,  ausi 
Mansuram  rudibus  vocem  signare  figuris." 

— Lucan,  Pharsalia,  III.  220—221. 

The  remarkable  genius  of  this  people  appears  in  the  fact 
that  they  chose  only  the  necessary  characters  from  the  con- 
fused mass  of  the  Egyptians.  They  chose  twenty-two  con- 
sonant letters,  and  rejected  the  rest  as  superfluous.  The  one 
imperfection  of  the  Phenician  alphabet,  was  the  absence  of 
vowel  signs.  We  find  the  first  invention  of  vowels  with  the 
Greeks,  But  the  Phenicians  had  really  invented  that  which 
was  principal,  and  were  the  first  among  the  races  of  men  to 
employ  a  purely  phonetic  mode  of  writing.  The  Cuneiform 
Inscriptions  of  Assyria,  Babylon,  and  Persia  are  not  properly 
alphabetical.  Excepting  these,  all  the  alphabets  of  the  globe, 
of  which  we  have  knowledge,  are  derived  from  the  characters 
of  the  Phenician  merchants  of  the  world.  M.  de  Roug6  and 
M.  Lenormant  have  demonstrated  that  the  Phenicians  based 
their  alphabet  not  on  the  hieroglyphic  symbols,  but  on  the 
hieratic  characters,  as  they  were  more  adapted  to  cursive 
writing.  The  date  of  the  Phenician  invention  can  not  be  fixed 
with  certainty,  but  it  is  placed  before  the  period  of  Moses  in 
Egypt.  The  Egyptians,  though  a  people  of  great  culture  and 
wise  institutions,  were  not  a  commercial  people.  The  Phe- 
nician merchants  at  an  early  date  entered  into  commercial  rela- 
tions with  this  people,  and  from  this  came  the  evolution  of  the 
rude  symbols  of  the  Egyptians  into  the  perfect  alphabet  of 
the  Phenicians. 

The  annexed  plates,  from  M.  Vigouroux's  Dictionnaire  de 
la  Bible,  illustrate  the  development  of  alphabetical  writing 
from  the  Hieroglyphics  of  the  Egyptians. 

The  decipherment  of  the  hieroglyphics  of  Egypt  is  the 
achievement  of  Jean  Fran9ois  Champollidn  the  younger  (1790 — 
1832).  This  gifted  scholar  in  his  short  life  accomplished  one 
of  the  greatest  of  human  discoveries,  and  with  his  dying  voice 
he  delivered  to  his  fellow-man  the  discoveries  of  his  genius. 
The  importance  of  his  discovery  is  very  great.     Egypt  was  a 


CO 

EGYPTIEN 

SEMITIQUE 

/ — r"^— N 

PhcnicieR 

Letiroa 
equivalentos 

Hieroglyphes 

Hie'raticjue 

r 

Hcbreu 

Grec 

RoiRilill 

t 

rt-^^' 

\ 

^ 

^ 

« 

A 

A 

h 

heroTi 

^ 

^      ^ 

S. 

D 

B 

B 

hip 

sie^e 

s 

Zj^     ^ 

7  ^ 

:i 

r 

A 

C 
D 

t(d) 

nudiv 

r"^ 

-*^    -^ 

A  <\ 

1 

h 

plan/  cl& 
maisoTv 

J 

nt  HI 

^ 

n 

~ 

E 

f(v) 

ceraste/ 

^^ 

^ 

Y  1 

1 

Y 

F 

z 

jxHi^iseazL 
soTisplu/nes 

^ 

d: 

/     7 

T 

1 

Z. 

• 

cribU? 

@ 

0?     ^ 

/^^ 

n 

H 

H 

t 

corde 
avecnoeiids 

r  ^ 

20>- 

©  fc' 

t^ 

e 

y 

paraHe/es^ 

W 

/    4^ 

?  V 

■> 

w 

1 

k 

ow  rase 
cLonriBazc 

-z=^ 

^     ^ 

/ 

D 

K 

<. 

1 

lioTin£/ 

^^ 

2t^    i^ 

6  J. 

'? 

A 

L 

m 

hiiow 

^ 

3 

y 

?2 

M 

M 

n 

e/nv 

VVWVN 

—^    fc;:^ 

y 

2 

N 

N 

s 

verrow 

M    - 

•i7  *^ 

^\ 

D 

- 

X 

c 

(•••••     »  ••••.• 

o 

V 

o 

o 

p 

nattb 

niui 
mill 

att,  ;;jf 

7? 

& 

n 

p 

s 

• 

serpent 

-K 

^^ 

A 

]: 



g 

coin? 

Z! 

^ 

9  V 

P 

^ 

Ql 

*r 

IfGUcke^ 

<r-> 

*P 

^ 

-I 

P 

K 

S 

jarduv 

W^ 

^ 

\A^ 

^ 

51 

5 

b 

bourse  (?) 
bras  offhant 
iin  pJiJi . 

]i4J 

6  ^  y^ 

K   -h 

r 

T 

T 

Noms 

Inscriplioa 
de  la  Stele 
doMesa 

irS'^'avJC. 

Pheniciea 

des  Monnaies  ei 
des  Inscriptions 

Tnscripiion 
de  Siioe 

(vcrsk  VIR' 
S-svantJC) 

Ancien  Hebreu 

des  Moniuaies 
et  des  Gemmes 

SanuaitHin. 

Hebreu 

des 
Inscriplioas 

Hebreu 

Ecriture 

carree 

^l^fv 

\^ 

^  Y  V 

:k>i 

kW^y. 

^f/^ 

^  K 

^ 

^a5i 

e^ 

^-9^ 

4 

9^  y 

a 

t2tX 

3 

GkCmeL 

77 

1  f\  1 

-A 

-^77 

^ 

J 

J)alet/o 

A^ 

A^A 

A 

^7i-T 

i" 

1  r 

T 

M 

^^ 

^11^ 

<^ 

^^TT 

^ 

TCn 

n 

Var 

r  Y 

^^-i 

1 

WfA 

«rf 

Ml 

1 

Zcuh 

^ 

^Z!^/1 

,?=» 

2  -2^  (-2:) 

'^ 

\f 

T 

letk 

WW 

^if^  ^ 

^ 

Mti'^B 

^'^ 

n^ 

n 

TbOl 

y^^ 

6 

(d^ 

to 

lad 

f^ 

^nsi/v 

a- 

^/^/ 

v^ 

1  1 

> 

Caph 

ry 

^yi7 

^ 

J^i^ 

:j:i 

::i:y 

1^ 

Lcamd/ 

u 

4441 

^ 

/VjlL 

ZZ 

UK 

h 

Menv 

yy 

yy^ 

y 

yi":)::} 

y::i 

>>D 

dD 

Niunu 

V 

yy) 

^ 

43::^^ 

h^ 

J 

)  i 

^cunec/v 

^^ 

t^^ 

^^ 

^ 

vc? 

0 

Jut 

o 

o^  o  t^ 

d 

O^-^^iO 

C^  'c^ 

^;^ 

J? 

Pe 

/y 

017 

9 

^^ 

:n::r 

J^ 

jq  B 

Isadd 

1^^ 

\\\ 

cy-i 

^7^f 

A)^ 

y 

V)^ 

(^opfu 

nf 

f  I7t 

/? 

f  i^r 

T? 

P 

? 

Res(Ji> 

i^ 

^^i 

A 

^^^ 

^1 

^^ 

1 

Schxn 

WW 

UJ  u\^  ^ 

w 

W>^60 

Co  u/ 

vv 

2; 

Thap' 

K 

//X>< 

X 

f  xY 

v/l 

5^7^ 

n 

602  APPENDIX. 

land  of  great  culture  and  civilization  in  the  remotest  times.  The 
Lawgiver  of  Israel  was  taught  by  them.  Their  institutions  were 
wise,  and  their  laws  were  just.  Moreover,  it  was  the  nursery  of 
the  Hebrew  people,  and  the  sojourn  in  Egypt  stamped  a  cer- 
tain characteristic  on  the  religious  and  civil  life  of  Israel. 

But  the  key  to  Egypt's  lore  had  been  lost,  and  the  message 
of  the  hieroglyphs  was  locked  in  mystery.  M.  Brugsch  Bey, 
estimates  the  number  of  these  hieroglyphs  to  be  more  than 
three  thousand. 

M.  Champollion,  after  a  successful  study  of  the  Coptic 
tongue,  entered  upon  the  great  task  of  unraveling  the  Egyp- 
tian mystery. 

In  1799,  the  French  lieutenant  of  artillery,  M.  Bouchard, 
while  establishing  the  Fort  St.  Julian  at  Rosetta  in  Egypt, 
discovered  what  has  since  become  famous  as  the  Rosetta 
stone.  This  stone  is  of  Egyptian  basalt,  about  ten  feet  in 
height  by  three  and  a  half  in  width.  It  is  mutilated  about 
the  angles.  The  stone  is  at  present  in  the  British  Museum. 
It  was  translated  by  Birch  in  Records  of  the  Past,  Vol.  IV. 

The  Rosetta  stone  bears  an  inscription  in  three  columns. 
The  first  column  is  hieroglyphic,  the  second  demotic,  the  third 
Greek.  The  inscription  contains  a  decree  of  the  priests  of 
Egypt,  in  honor  of  Ptolemy  Epiphanes,  directing  that  a  statue 
be  erected  in  his  honor  in  the  temples,  and  that  he  should  re- 
ceive divine  honors.  At  the  same  time  in  the  Isle  of  Philae, 
near  Assouan,  in  Upper  Egppt,  a  smaller  inscription  in  hiero- 
glyphics and  Greek  had  been  found,  which  aided  Champollion 
in  his  decipherment.  It  was  the  usage  of  the  Egyptians  to 
write  the  name  of  the  royal  personages  on  Cartouches.  In 
the  Greek  column  of  the  bilingual  monument  of  Philae,  the 
name  of  Cleopatra  was  engraven  in  Greek,  in  the  Greek  column 
of  the  Rosetta  stone,  the  name  of  Ptolemy  existed  in  similar 
mode  of  writing.  Champollion  also  observed  that  correspond- 
ing to  these  two  names  were  two  cartouches  in  the  hiero- 
glyphs, and  he  drew  the  conclusion  that  the  signs  in  these 
cartouches  corresponded  to  the  Greek  letters.  This  illation 
was  confirmed  by  the  fact,  that  there  are  five  letters  in 
KAEOnATPA  and  HTOAEMAIOS  which  are  identical.  The 
five  letters  corresponded  to  five  signs  which  are  identical  in 
the  cartouches. 

The  annexed  plate  reproduces  the  cartouches  of  Cleopatra 
and  Ptolemy  with  Champollion's  system  of  interpretation. 
We  are  indebted  for  this  plate  to  M.  Vigouroux  in  La  Bible  et 
les  Decouvertes  Modernes. 


APPENDIX. 


603 


I 


-KAEOHATPA 


nr 

a 

3  k 
5  6 

7 

i 

\  . 

9 

.  10     II 


t^        Triangle K, 

tS^     Lion. L 

s.D 


e. 


'% 


|.^ 


Roseau A. 

Corde O. 

Rectangle P. 

Algle A. 

Main T. 

Bouche R. 

Aigle A. 


/0,U.^2»0  Deterniinatifs  des  noms    de 
femmes. 


If 


{UnU 


nTOA£MAIOZ 


i  '    s 


i  ni 


1 


!.  @        Rectangle P. 

2.  £ZX       Demi-cercle T. 

l.ifl       Corde , O. 

i.  .S^    Lion L. 

5.  dZZ    Coudee M. 

6,7  *J  U      Double  roseau AI. 

Dossier 8. 


P 


1. — Cartouche  de  la  reine  Cleopatre. 
2. — Cartouche  du  roi  Ftolemee. 


604  APPENDIX. 

Starting  from  this  position,  he  compared  the  two  car- 
touches. Conjecturing  that  the  triangle  in  the  cartouche  of 
Cleopatra  represented  the  letter  K,  he  found  that  the  second 
figure  was  that  of  a  lion  which  corresponded  to  the  fourth 
figure  in  the  cartouche  of  Ptolemy.  He  thence  concluded 
that  it  was  a  phonetic  sign  for  L,  which  also  is  the  first  letter 
of  the  name  of  lion  in  Coptic,  Tv&^&tO;  By  similar  method 
with  the  other  signs  he  proceeded  as  far  as  the  sixth  hiero- 
glyph, the  Eagle.  This  does  not  occur  in  the  other  cartouche, 
but  as  it  occurs  again  in  Cleopatra  in  the  ninth  place,  the  illa- 
tion was  plain  that  it  represented  A.  Some  difficulty  was  ex- 
perienced by  Champollion  with  the  seventh  hieroglyph  of  the 
cartouche  of  Cleopatra.  To  justify  his  theory,  it  ought  to 
correspond  to  the  T  of  the  cartouche  of  Ptolemy.  But  while 
the  hieroglyph  of  Cleopatra  was  a  hand,  the  corresponding 
one  in  the  cartouche  of  Ptolemy  was  a  semicircle.  Concerning 
this  he  came  to  the  conclusion,  which  has  since  been  confirmed 
by  experience,  that  the  letter  T  was  represented  by  both,  the 
semicircle  and  the  hand,  there  being  perhaps  some  slight 
modification  in  its  sound  in  different  positions. 

Champollion  applied  his  theory  successfully  to  the  car- 
touche of  Alexander,  and  then  to  other  monuments,  till  he 
was  able  to  publish  in  1824  his  Precis  du  Syst^me  Hiero- 
glyphique.  Before  his  death  he  had  found  the  keys  of  260 
hieroglyphics.  Others  have  made  use  of  his  discovery  to  com- 
pare the  hieroglyphics  and  the  hieratic  and  demotic  characters, 
and  to  open  up  the  literary  resources  of  the  valley  of  Nile. 

Distinguished  scholars  have  worked  upon  the  theory  of 
Champollion.  Lenormant,  Nestor  1*  Hote,  Salvolini,  Rosellini, 
Ungarelli,  Leemans,  Osburn,  Birch,  Hincks,  Lepsius,  de 
Rouge,  de  Saulcy,  Mariette,  Chabos,  Deveria,  de  Horrack, 
Lef^bure,  Pierret,  Grebaut,  Brugsch,  Diimichen,  Louth,  Eisel- 
hor,  Ebers,  Stern,  Pleyte,  Lieblein,  Goodwin,  and  Lepage- 
Renouf  have  perfected  Champollion's  system  so  that  the  lan- 
guage of  the  hieroglyphs  is  as  open  as  the  works  of  Cicero 
and  Livy. 

A  discovery  of  considerable  importance  was  accomplished 
in  1869  by  M.  Clermont-Ganneau,  the  dragoman  of  the  French 
Consulate  at  Jerusalem.  It  is  at  present  in  the  Louvre  at 
Paris.     It  is  called  the  Moabitic  stone  or  the  Stela  of  Mesa. 

It  was  originally  a  Monolithic  block  of  black  basalt,  dotted 
with  bright  spots.  M.  de  Vogue  declares  that  the  Stela  of 
Mesa  has  no  equal  among  the  antiquities  of  the  Hebrews. 

The  annexed  plate  shows  the  restored  stone. 


APPENDIX. 


605 


606  APPENDIX. 

On  account  of  the  hardness  of  the  stone,  the  inscription  on 
the  face  of  this  famous  stone  was  not  deeply  engraven.  It 
contains  thirty-four  lines  of  Moabitic  writing,  a  form  of  speech 
having  close  affinity  with  the  Hebrew  of  the  Bible.  The 
writing  is  in  the  Phenician  characters  used  by  the  ancient 
Samaritans  and  Hebrews. 

The  Stela  is  one  metre  in  heighth  and  about  sixty  centi- 
metres in  breadth.  Its  anterior  face  is  without  writing.  The 
date  of  its  writing  is  about  nine  hundred  years  before  Christ ; 
and  since  that  time  up  to  the  time  of  its  discovery  it  has  lain 
at  the  base  of  a  little  hill  near  Dhiban,  a  little  east  of  the 
Dead  Sea. 

When  the  Bedouins  became  aware  that  the  stone  possessed 
value,  and  was  to  be  taken  from  their  countr}%  they  broke  it 
in  pieces.  Luckily  a  reproduction  of  the  inscription  had  been 
made  by  M.  Ganneau,  before  the  stone  was  broken.  He  was 
able  to  gather  about  twenty  of  the  pieces,  and  he  has  restored 
the  stone  with  these  and  a  plaster-cast.  The  clearer  portions 
of  the  inscription  are  those  parts  which  were  engraved  on  the 
plaster-cast.  The  restoration  is  faithful,  as  it  was  made  from 
the  facsimile  made  of  the  stone  before  it  was  broken. 

The  Stela  of  Mesa  is  the  most  ancient  known  monument 
of  alphabetical  writing. 

King  Mesa,  the  author  of  the  inscription,  according  to  II. 
(IV.)  Kings  III.  4,  "was  a  possessor  of  sheep,  and  rendered 
unto  the  King  of  Israel,  a  hundred  thousand  lambs  and  a 
hundred  thousand  rams,  with  the  wool."  After  the  death  of 
Achab,  Mesa  rebelled  against  the  King  of  Israel.  He  made 
war  upon  the  Ammonites,  Idumeans,  and  the  Israelites,  and 
took  several  cities  of  Israel.  These  victories  are  the  theme  of 
the  famous  inscription. 

He  says  naught  of  his  subsequent  defeat  and  the  destruc- 
tion of  his  kingdom  by  the  allied  armies  of  Jehoram  of  Israel, 
and  Jehoshaphat  of  Judah.  Mesa  being  reduced  to  the  last 
extremity,  offered  his  eldest  son  as  a  holocaust  to  the  god 
Chamos.  At  this  spectacle,  the  Israelites  were  filled  with 
horror,  and  returned  with  great  booty  to  their  own  country. 
The  Stela  recounts  only  the  victories  of  Mesa. 

As  the  stone  is  mutilated,  a  part  of  its  data  will  never  be 
known,  but  in  its  mutilated  state  it  is  of  great  worth  to  bibli- 
cal exegesis. 


